🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1815@uhccux.UUCP> garvin@uhccux.UUCP (Jay Garvin) writes:
>We have a dedicated SE serving around 30 macs or so with 3 imagewriters and 
>an NTX laserwriter.  Aside from being slow, our 'Laserwriter' drivers
>are getting clobbered, and sometimes while someone is MacWrite-ing 
>something, the screen will freeze. Only recourse is to reset the machine.

>Could these things be caused by running MacServe to it's limits, or
>does this sound like something unrelated to MacServe?  Has anyone 
>had this happen to them before?
  
  In the networks that I have set up I have noticed a significant performance
hit in a network with over twenty nodes.  Apple says no more than 32, but my
rule of thumb is no more than 18.  If there are more than 18 nodes you should
get a bridge and break the network into two zones.  Remember you have to
count all Appletalk devices on the network, Appletalk ImageWriter, All the
turned on Macintosh's, and all the turned on LaserWriters.  And any other
Appletalk Device that's turned on.
  Also make sure that **EVERY** single Macintosh on the network is using the
same version of the LaserWriter print driver.  If someone uses a different
LaserWriter driver than everyone else, even for just one print job, it can
cause serious problems for everyone else.  The only solution after that happens
is to turn off the LaserWriter, and have everyone go back to chooser again.

>We are thinking of moving to AppleShare.  We are waiting for the
>new version due out next month.  Does anyone have any comments on
>AppleShare?  Especially the new version that is coming out.  
>BEST FEATURES? / WORST FEATURES?

>How about some others, like TOPS?  

  AppleShare is just about the best file server software out there in my 
opinion.  If you have more than 10 people using the file server it's also
cheper than TOPS.
  Tops is good, but each workstation in the network can be setup as a server
for every other workstation.  This is the best part of Tops, it's distributed.
Appleshare is centralized.  The debate regarding Centralized and distributed
systems has been going on for about 20-30 years now, and I'm not about to make
the definative statment regarding which is best.  You have to analyse your
particular situation, and then decide for yourself.
  Tops takes more memory from each workstation, and if a workstation has
allowed others to access it then the user will notice SIGNIFICANT 
periods of dead time when others are requesting information from that
particular workstation.  Although it's not required, most people end up
dedicating a machine as a server anyways, because no one wants to use a 
machine that is fast one second, and slow the next.  Also since people can
use a Machine that is also serving the network, if that machine crashes because
they choose to run some "bad" software, then it destroy's everyone else on
the network. If you have central file server, and that's all it does, then it's
easier to maintain network stability.
  TOPS is excellent is some situation.  Those situation are when you have
more than one type of computer on the network, Macs ---> MS-Dos --> Sun 
workstations.  And TOPS is cheaper if you have fewer than 10 workstations
on the network.
  But if you have more than 10 workstotions, and they are all Mac's, then
I'd recommend Appleshare.  It's cheaper for one.  And in my opinion offers
more features.  It has good security measures.  It is directly supported
thru the finder.  You can use TOP's volumes from the finder, but they have
their own security method that the finder knows nothing about.  Security is
implemented in a DA that either allows you to "mount" a volume, or not
"mount" a volume.  Once the volume is mounted that's it.  You now have access
to the whole thing.  TOP's does allow you to just offer "Folders" over the
network, but when someone else mount's that folder on their workstation it
creates a desktop file in the folder, that's fine for the workstation, but
what that does to the original Harddisk that it came from I don't know.

>Is it smart to go with AppleShare for the future standards?

  If anyone has the clout to set a standard, I'd rather bet on Apple than
some other company that's doing the same thing.  Most file server software
has been modified for Apple's new standards.  Notice Apple didn't modify
their software to meet someone else's standard.  Also a lot of multiuser
software has been modified to work with Appleshare, and Appleshare offers
some features that make it easier for a programmer to implement multi-user
software, most other network software doesn't yet offer these "internal"
features.  And now that Appleshare is around, they will most likely duplicate
the Appleshare model, rather than triing to go it alone with their own way
of doing things.


David M. O'Rourke

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
| dorourke@polyslo | Disclaimer:  All opinions in this message are mine, but  |
|                  |              if you like them they can be yours too.     |
|                  |              Besides I'm just a student so what do I     |
|                  |              know!                                       |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|    When you have to place a disclaimer in your mail you know it's a sign    |
| that there are TOO many Lawyer's.                                           |
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++