Στις 25-11-2011, ημέρα Παρ, και ώρα 20:34 -0500, ο/η Jay Goldberg
έγραψε:
> I've found that as fat clients these aren't quite as "snappy" as I'd
> like them to be.


With regards to video performance, fat clients are *exactly* as fast as
local, standalone installations. You can have 3D acceleration, VDPAU and
whatever else your driver offers. 3D acceleration over the network (for
thin clients) is more difficult to achieve and much, much slower.


They only difference, performance-wise, to local installations, is in
the disk access:
 * Fat clients have e.g. 1 Gbps shared "disk" (network) bandwidth.
   That's usually a bit faster than one (non SSD) new hard disk.
   So if one serves multiple clients with 1 Gbps connection, that
   would be slower than local installations.
 * But, since most of that read-only network "disk" is already cached
   on the server from previous requests, there's no disk rotation
   latency involved, which is a big plus in disk speed. It's somewhat
   like having an SSD disk on the server.
 * Finally, if one is using NBD with compression enabled, that's
   about 10 times faster than NFS and a few times faster than local
   disks, since more data fits on the same bandwidth.
 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure 
contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, 
security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this 
data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d
_____________________________________________________________________
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