Article View: news.admin
Article #4107Re: NNTP vs. remote NFS mounts
From: lear
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1987 06:09
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1987 06:09
30 lines
1680 bytes
1680 bytes
Regarding NFS vs NNTP, Mel Pleasant at Rutgers has written in support
into News for NFS. The benefits are considerable in my view for the
following reasons:
(1) In general, support does not have to be added to specific
programs such as rn or postnews (although you may run into
byte order problems when using vnews and its artfile.
Mounting one file system and making several links seems far
more elegant then rewriting all the utilities you have to use
rrn.
(2) Surveys should be considerably faster (although I do not have
figures) using NFS mounts and vnews because of the artsfile.
The reason is that there is much less traffic involved going
between machines since the survey is already compiled.
Furthermore, NFS should be faster the TCP, which is what NNTP
uses.
(3) For diskless suns, the cost of NFS News should be the same as
the cost of normal news.
So why use nntp? I came to the conclusion that the big plus of nntp
is that you don't need NFS. This is what it came down to when I wrote
an NNTP client program for a -20.
...eliot
--
[lear@rutgers.rutgers.edu]
[{harvard|pyrnj|seismo|ihnp4}!rutgers!lear]
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<304@aramis.RUTGERS.EDU>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!cbatt!gatech!seismo!rutgers!aramis!learReferences:
<918@smeagol.JPL.NASA.GOV>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!cbatt!gatech!seismo!rutgers!aramis!lear From: lear@aramis.UUCP Newsgroups: news.admin Subject: Re: NNTP vs. remote NFS mounts Message-ID: <304@aramis.RUTGERS.EDU> Date: Thu, 5-Mar-87 01:09:18 EST Article-I.D.: aramis.304 Posted: Thu Mar 5 01:09:18 1987 Date-Received: Fri, 6-Mar-87 20:44:15 EST References: <918@smeagol.JPL.NASA.GOV> Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. Lines: 30