hy ,
may be i am wrong , but i see only one client accessing your System in case of the AFS test .
you have to use concurrent accesses to the same data , to get performance improvement against NFS .
to compare the speed between 1 NFS to 1 AFS client is okay and you are right , NFS is faster in this case .
but with multiple clients it's not and that is in fact , how you usually utilize a Fileserver.
Sven
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dept. 4192 , AIS Infrastructure
Development Leader Stonehenge
Phone (+49)-6131-84-3151
Fax (+49)-6131-84-6708
Mobil (+49)-171-970-6664
E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Questions on Stonehenge : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Andrei Maslennikov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
06/24/2003 07:53 PM |
To: Sven Oehme/Germany/[EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [OpenAFS] OpenAFS speed |
On Tue, 24 Jun 2003, Sven Oehme wrote:
> it's all a question on the Hardware and fine tuning Network , Server ...
Unfortunately, this does not looks like that.. On a very performant
hardware, we clearly see that with AFS we are protocol-bound.
> we also have Transfer rates >25 MB/S into AFS in our Stonehenge Solution
We see 47/30 (W/R). But NFS does 80/80 and more on the same hw base.
Andrei.
