Conrad, I understand why replacing hubs with switches is an improvement. However, I never heard of link aggregation. What does it do and how does it improve the network performance? Why is it one has to _invest_ in it?
On 19-Oct-02 Conrad Lawes wrote: > > I would argue that you should use a switch (not a hub) when using > ltsp. A switch will definitely minimize network collision. > Whenever you are running multiple diskless clients it's important > that you reduce as much network bottleneck as possible to maximize > performance. Using 100/Mb switches instead of hubs is one way of > reducing network bottlenecks. An additional option is to invest > in link aggregation (nic pooling) solution on the ltsp server. > > Remi BERNHARD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > On 17 Oct 2002 17:21:13 +0000, Joyce LAMBERT wrote >> > > When ltsp is used, i can notice lots colision when using ltsp. >> > > More tere >> > > are worstation working and more colision i have. >> > > >> > > So with 4 worstation, the network become realy slowly and >> > > can't be used. -------------------------------------------- Wouter DeBacker ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 19-Oct-02 23:27:39 (SuSE Linux Xfmail) -------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: Access Your PC Securely with GoToMyPC. Try Free Now https://www.gotomypc.com/s/OSND/DD _____________________________________________________________________ Ltsp-discuss mailing list. To un-subscribe, or change prefs, goto: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltsp-discuss For additional LTSP help, try #ltsp channel on irc.openprojects.net
