Dear all This may not be a suitable question to be asked here. However, from my experience here are a lot of experts, I may get the answer more quickly than somewhere else.
Assuming in an ethernet I have two linux boxes-- A and B. A is a NFS server, and B is a client,which mounts a partition from A as NFS type. In that NFS partition, there is a big data file,let's call it FILE. Now, let me compare two different conditions: 1. A open FILE locally, and read data from FILE to a buffer, then using standard TCP/IP socket to transfer this buffer to B's buffer. 2. B open FILE from NFS partition, and read data from FILE to buffer. What I concern about is which case is faster? Which case is more costly from the view of wall time? I assume there is 3 steps in Case 2 ---(1)open file on A (2) A read data (3) A send data to B through some protocol. All these 3 steps are transparent for user. Am I correct for this assumption? And if 2 is done frequently, will B buffer FILE locally after the first read? I am considering a parallel application now. It's very important for me to get a clear idea about the cost for data transfers. I know little about NFS except using it. Please give me some idea about this issue. Thanks very much! ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com _______________________________________________ Oscar-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oscar-users
