On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 22:16 +0100, mick wrote: > On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 21:47:47 +0100 > Tixy <t...@yxit.co.uk> allegedly wrote: > > > On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 20:39 +0100, mick wrote: > > > Depends what you mean by "fast". But in real world usage (pulling a > > > video file from store) it is about three times faster than an NSLU2. > > > Consider the following tests using scp to grab a 1.1 GB video file > > > (so some overhead in the encryption as opposed to a straight wire > > > copy) > > > > In my experience the encryption and other overheads from ssh are a bit > > more than 'some'. Just tested a big file copy from my Sheevaplug and I > > get 6MB/s from scp, and 38MB/s over nfs. > > > > :-) > > Yep - but both devices were treated the same. > > The point is the comparison between the two devices. The slug has a > slow CPU, little memory and slow networking hardware. The DNS is > faster (but not, I'll concede, "fast").
True. I guess the point I was thinking of is that when using ssh things may well be limited by CPU performance, which, if the usecase you care about is a NAS using say nfa, then something with a slower CPU but better i/o (disk, network) may be more suitable. I'm not saying that this is the case for the devices under discussion, just putting it forward as a consideration. -- Tixy -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1343374461.3088.4.ca...@computer2.home
