🚀 go-pugleaf

davidsen@ariel.crd.GE.COM (william E Davidsen) writes:
> In article <1992Dec23.015329.8249@brt.deakin.edu.au>, dougcc@brt.deakin.edu.au (Douglas Miller) writes:
> | no, no, take your pick of VMScluster, DNS, NFS, DECnet/OSI, TCP/IP
> 
>   I tried to stay out, but VMS isn't even transparent across it's local
> devices. A name like
> 
>   joesvax::a$physical_disk$name_here_like_dra0:[dir.dir.dir]filename
> 
> may work from anywhere on the net, but you need to know the node name,
> physical device name, and lots of syntax with variable numbers of
> colons, and [names] as well.

That's one case, ie a DECnet file access.  The exact unix equivalent of

$ cmd joesvax::a$physical_disk$name_here_like_dra0:[dir.dir.dir]filename

% rcp joesvax:/some-root/some-dir/filename localfile
% cmd localfle
% rm localfile

Now, which do _you_ prefer?  The unix approach requires local storage.
DECnet file access doesn't.  (Sure, a lot of cases can be dealt with by
piping, but it's not the same.)

File sharing via DFS, NFS or clustering is genuinely transparent.  (NFS
has some gotchas if the server is a unix box, but only because there aren't
any useful features in the unix filesystem. 8-)

So what's your point?

--
Don Stokes, ZL2TNM (DS555)                        don@zl2tnm.gen.nz (home)
Network Manager, Computing Services Centre            don@vuw.ac.nz (work)
Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand              +64-4-495-5052