On Sun, 19 Mar 2006, R P Herrold wrote:

> On Sun, 19 Mar 2006, Daniel Mealha Cabrita wrote:
> 
> > Now it's me who's curious...
> >
> > I wonder why did you choose segmenting the ethernet at server side with a
> >couple of [EMAIL PROTECTED], instead of using a single 1Gbit card and a 
> >switch
> >with 1-2 gigabit ports? You also wanted a QoS effect?
> 
> The load to the upstream side (largely text protocols without 
> graphic images to make the content 'fat') was much lighter 
> than the delivery of content to the X-server clients from the 
> LTSP servers.  Gig ethernet was not needed there.  Possibly I 
> should have run the NFS server with a dedicated link to each 
> LTSP server, in handsight, as that link was the next busiest, 
> after the links to the clients.
> 
> [Tuning the link layout was determined by sampling the 
> interface statistics]

I am not quite certain where the NFS server is in your setup ?

Is it a single server for the whole network ?

What was the disk arrangement on the NFS server(s) ?

Cheers,     Andy!


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language
that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast
and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642
_____________________________________________________________________
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.freenode.net

Reply via email to