I have used RH Linux boxes as well with out any
huge problems, but they are still noticeably
slower than Solaris x86 boxes doing the same
thing, especially as load and file size increases.
-----Original Message-----
> From: Gerry Creager N5JXS
Cc: 'Patrick O'Reilly'; ldm-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; gembud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: 11/14/2003 8:57 PM
Then again, the only problem I can attribute to using nfs on RH9 is some
remaining virus traffic.
I'm running v3 here on Mesonet. We do some "interesting" cross-mounts
without problems.
gerry
Robert Mullenax wrote:
> Under RH 6.2, we would have to specify NFS version 2, but this
> version of RH supports version 3. I would maybe look at NFS
> versions to see which version each box is running.
>
> As an aside, based on a lot of NFS use here..
> I will say that you will be much happier in the long run
> if you just ran Solaris x86 instead of RH 9. NFS was
> and continues to be a problem on Linux. You will never get
> the same NFS performance with a Linux NFS server as you
> would with a Solaris box (SPARC or x86).
>
> Robert
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Patrick O'Reilly [mailto:patrick.oreilly@xxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 12:29 PM
> To: ldm-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; gembud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: LDM/GEMPAK NFS Question
>
>
> Hello,
>
> I am switching my LDM machine from a Sun Solaris 8 machine to a PC
running
> RedHat 9. This PC will feed the data via NFS to 4 Sun Solaris 8
machines,
> who in turn run GEMPAK scripts on the data and post imagery to the
web. My
> prior setup had the 4 Suns mounting the NFS share of another Sun and
things
> went well. I just made the switchover, i.e. made the PC/Redhat
machine the
> NFS server to the 4 Suns, and the mount went fine. The problem is,
now the
> GEMPAK scripts take a very long time to run on the Suns. A simple
script
> takes a couple minutes where it used to take 20 seconds. I am
assuming that
> this is because of the communication between the PC and the Suns via
the NFS
> mount. Are there any NFS settings I can use to make the data read
faster?
> Is this even the problem? Has anyone faced this problem? Any wisdom
on the
> situation would be helpful. Thanks!
>
> Patrick
> _______________________________________
> Patrick O'Reilly
> Meteorological Decision Support Scientist
> The STORM Project - University of Northern Iowa
> patrick.oreilly@xxxxxxx ~ ph: 319-273-3789
> http://www.uni.edu/storm
>
> "No trees were killed in the making of this e-mail...however,
> a large number of electrons were horribly inconvenienced."
--
Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager@xxxxxxxx
Network Engineering -- AATLT, Texas A&M University
Cell: 979.229.5301 Office: 979.458.4020 FAX: 979.847.8578
Page: 979.228.0173
Office: 903A Eller Bldg, TAMU, College Station, TX 77843
