[ale] NFS performance

Stephen R. Wylie swylie at wylie.com
Wed Apr 2 17:02:13 EST 1997

On Fri, 28 Mar 1997, Bob's ALE Mail wrote:

> Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 18:06:46 -0500
> From: Bob's ALE Mail <transam at cavu.com>
> To: ale at cc.gatech.edu
> Subject: [ale] NFS performance
> Someone I know is using the NFS server on a RedHat system, claims that
> it is a non-kernel NFS implementation and claims that the performance is
> slow and is there an alternative Linux NFS with better performance.
> I would suspect slow routers first.

i dunno about this...

> Can anyone shed some light on this?

i'm gonna try... ;)

> Thanks,
> Bob Toxen
> bob at cavu.com
> transam at cavu.com [ALE & linux-ppp]
> http://www.mindspring.com/~cavu
> Fly-By-Day Consulting, Inc.
> "Venimus, Vidimus, Dolavimus" (We came, we saw, we hacked)

i have an alpha with redhat4.0 [yuck] installed on it. it is faster than
my intel linux boxes in every respect EXCEPT nfs... It is only capable of
about 35k/sec transfer rates... I get MUCH faster nfs over a 486/66 with
a couple of old ide hard drives [i built this beast from spare parts
laying around]. 100+ k/sec

Looks like redhat dropped this ball too... They must have dropped balls
all over their field; I spent 2 days tracking down all the major problems
with redhat and fixing them.

All my intel systems are slackware... Slackware's not perfect either, but
if you know how to run a linux system, imho it's the way to go.

I'm not trying to get anyone to turn on their flamethrowers on this one... 
Just stating my opinion [which might be fulla **** in yours ;)  ] I'm
totally unimpressed with redhat; both the company and their linux


Stephen R. Wylie	      swylie at wylie.com
All unsolicited commercial email proofread at $250 per 1K received.
"They gave me a book of checks.  They didn't ask for any deposits."
     -- Congressman Joe Early (D-Mass)

More information about the Ale mailing list