home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!news.graphics.cornell.edu!boa.graphics.cornell.edu!hurf
- From: hurf@boa.graphics.cornell.edu (Hurf Sheldon)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.hp
- Subject: Re: How to server clients over more than one LAN?
- Date: 7 Jan 1993 17:42:11 GMT
- Organization: Cornell University Program of Computer Graphics
- Lines: 29
- Distribution: world
- Message-ID: <1ihq1jINN6ht@loon.graphics.cornell.edu>
- References: <1icqn1INNiel@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu> <7371517@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: boa.graphics.cornell.edu
-
- Keywords
-
- |> OK, this is as unofficial as you can get. :-)
- |>
- |> HP-UX Diskless is a proprietary protocol, not a multi-vendor standard,
- |> for various and sundry reasons (many historical). As such it has some
- |> advantages and some disadvantages compared to, say, NFS. (See an
- |> earlier but concurrent discussion in this same newsgroup.) One of
- |> Diskless's disadvantages is the abovementioned restriction. I wouldn't
- |> bet on it going away... I'm not a kernel guru but I think it's buried
- |> in the design.
- |>
- |> This disadvantage could hypothetically be one reason for moving away
- |> from Diskless to more industry-standard protocols.
-
- I don't see the wisdom in sh*tcanning something that works so well
- on the basis of 'industry standard' unless there is a standard
- that is better. I run HP clusters because it is easier than
- the industry standard and file i/o between systems is often 100%
- of ethernet bandwidth (how do you do that, anyway?) while the
- industry standard is hard pressed to do 20% (of ethernet bandwidth)
- in anything approaching a loaded environment.
-
- --
- Hurf Sheldon Network: hurf@graphics.cornell.edu
- Program of Computer Graphics Phone: 607 255 6713
-
- 580 Eng. Theory Center, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y. 14853
-
-