On Tue, 11 Jan 2000, Carel Fellinger wrote: cfelli >Okee, so there is more overhead. So more bytes have to be transfered. cfelli >But almost doubling it seems a bit overdone, doesn't it. So I'm still cfelli >wondering... Is the overhead mainly in the extra bytes to be sent, cfelli >then a 100Mbs Ethernet card would improve things. Or is the overhead cfelli >also in the pre/post processing, so a faster computer is wat's needed?
look at a network monitor like iptraf when transferring files and look at how many bytes are transferred during file copy with NFS, are you using knfsd or a user space nfsd? have you tried switching to knfsd if your using a userspace nfsd or the other way around if your using a userspace nfsd? i have seen a lot of reports that the nfs system in linux is horrible at the moment, if NFS is really important to you it may be worth looking into if there are commercial packages available that give linux better NFS support. nate ----------------------------------------[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]-- Vice President Network Operations http://www.firetrail.com/ Firetrail Internet Services Limited http://www.aphroland.org/ Everett, WA 425-348-7336 http://www.linuxpowered.net/ Powered By: http://comedy.aphroland.org/ Debian 2.1 Linux 2.0.36 SMP http://yahoo.aphroland.org/ -----------------------------------------[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]-- 12:28pm up 146 days, 28 min, 1 user, load average: 0.59, 0.41, 0.31
