home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!gatech!rpi!usc!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!sobeco!rcorco!mksinfo!solucor!jack
- From: jack@solucor.uucp (Jacques Gelinas)
- Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
- Subject: Re: Need opinions: PC UNIX <-> Novell
- Message-ID: <1992Jul29.051205.23512@solucor.uucp>
- Date: 29 Jul 92 05:12:05 GMT
- References: <BrvF40.1pF@well.sf.ca.us> <1992Jul27.071018.18775@hippo.ru.ac.za>
- Organization: solucorp
- Lines: 82
-
- spnp@hippo.ru.ac.za (Mr NL Parker) writes:
-
- >In <BrvF40.1pF@well.sf.ca.us> rdodson@well.sf.ca.us (Robert Dodson) writes:
-
-
-
- >>Hi,
-
- >> We have a Novell network with ~20 PCs on it. We will
- >>be getting several PCs running some kind of PC UNIX.
- >>What are peoples opinions and experiences with connecting
- >>the two?
-
- >> - Use the Novell server to export a drive via NFS to UNIX PCs?
-
- >> - Use a seperate UNIX network and use a gateway to connect?
-
- >> - Lose the Novel server and use a UNIX box to serve PCs and UNIX?
-
-
- We are using such a setup. We have several SUN Sparc and 3 486/33 novell
- server with few GIG of disk. Here are some pros and cons about it.
-
- -NFS software for DOS PCs are still expensive, and take much room in memory.
- NFS is more complicate (protocol) to handle on the PC side. Program
- like biod are very difficult to implement on the DOS pc side.
-
- -Novell is very (There is no word) expensive. Novell 3.x + NFS is
- very very very expensive.
-
- -A 486/33 is quite fast as a server for IPX clients. Faster than a
- equivalent UNIX machine with NFS. This happens because of the very
- nature of NFS (stateless).
-
- -Rebooting a UNIX NFS server during lunch hour may be done without
- telling everyone. It will generally goes unnotice (unless someone
- is using its machine). Doing so with a Novell server won't be free.
- Every users will have to login again. If they left open database, they
- will be sorry. If you intend to have several server, NFS may be a better
- choice.
-
- -Novell NFS is a very slow NFS server. Unusable for transaction intensive
- activity from a UNIX client. We once install our news on it. When the
- Sun Sparc was unbatching, everything was going sloooooooooow. Several
- users were pretty sure the server was down.
-
- Assuming n:\bigdir and /novell/bigdir point to the same place,
- the following command will go very smooth:
-
- xcopy c:\bigdir\*.* n:\bigdir
-
- The following command will take forever
-
- cp /bigdir/* /novell/bigdir
-
- -Few DOS PC programs are totally UNUSABLE on an NFS server, because they
- write several very small packet to the server. At least, every program
- written with BC++ 3.0 will kill your hard drive. I have a patch for this
- if interested. On some DOS (3.31), the following commands will take
- several (and more) seconds to complete if n:toto is on the NFS server.
-
- dir > n:toto
-
- We just received NFS 3.2 from Novell. It solves some flaws about the ways
- trusties are managed. I don't know yet if the performance is up.
-
- Performance wise, it is best to have both. A novell server for DOS pc, and
- a UNIX server for UNIX box. Having NFS on the Novell server is
- a good idea to share file.
-
- I prefer to avoid Novell, because unlike UNIX, nobody "lives" with novell.
- It means that in your organisations, nobody will ever be fluent in Novell.
- A unix server knows the same commands as a UNIX client. It means that
- UNIX users have more chances to undertand the setup of a UNIX NFS server
- than a DOS user have chance to understand NOVELL: DOS and NOVELL are two
- separate world.
-
- --
-
- --------------------------------------------------------
- Jacques Gelinas (jack@solucor.uucp)
- Today it's my opinion
-