Derrick J Brashear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 16 Jan 2003, Martin Schulz wrote: > > > Paul Blackburn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > It seems that you looked at the performance of 1 client with 1 server? > > > Are your figures for a single access to a server? > > > > That is the natural measuring a user would do. That is what is > > important to *him*. That is what *he* will judge AFS on. > > I don't give my users a server to themselves. I wouldn't if it were NFS, > either.
Sorry if I was too imprecise: The volume a user can write to is likely to be only his "personal" volume. (At least that is the case in our setup, and I suppose others handle it in similar ways.) And the rw-instance of that volume can only be on a single server. So if a user has to decide if he is satisfied with the present AFS performance, he will naturally sit down in front of his client station and start hammering on his rw-mounted volume. This is effectively a one-client-one-server benchmark. This is a different focus from the overall view of an AFS admin. That's all I wanted to state. Was this clear now? > > How does this affect the "delete 10000 small files" performance? > > If you use a Solaris fileserver instead of Linux, file deletion > performance probably improves, for instance. There are lots of variables. Could you share with us the reason of your expectation? Yours, -- Martin Schulz [EMAIL PROTECTED] Uni Karlsruhe, Institut f. wissenschaftliches Rechnen u. math. Modellbildung Engesser Str. 6, D-76128 Karlsruhe _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
