palowoda@fiver.UUCP (Bob Palowoda) (10/24/89)
Has anyone configured large NFS systems with DOS NFS 3.0 clients?
(NFS on a 386 type UNIX)
I'm interested on comments about which eithernet card you used?
8bit, 16bit dumb or intelligent.
I have been useing Excelans which seem to be fast and was wondering
if the WD8003E would work without to much performance degradation.
Did anyone compile SOS on NFS 3.0 and get a server working on the
DOS side? Or has anyone tried SOS on Interdrive?
---Bob
--
Bob Palowoda pacbell!indetech!palowoda *Home of Fiver BBS* login: bbs
Home {sun|daisy}!ys2!fiver!palowoda (415)-623-8809 1200/2400
Work {sun|pyramid|decwrl}!megatest!palowoda (415)-623-8806 2400/9600/19200 TB
Voice: (415)-623-7495 Public access UNIX XBBS tds@cbnewsh.ATT.COM (antonio.desimone) (10/26/89)
From article <915@fiver.UUCP>, by palowoda@fiver.UUCP (Bob Palowoda): > > Has anyone configured large NFS systems with DOS NFS 3.0 clients? > (NFS on a 386 type UNIX) I'm looking for a similar answer. I'd like to use my 386 System V Unix box as an NFS client with a Sun server. Has anyone done this. or have any informed opinions on the subject? Also, what are the prefered Ethernet (really Starlan-10) boards for an AT-bus 386? -- Tony DeSimone AT&T Bell Laboratories Holmdel, NJ 07733 att!tds386e!tds
johnl@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us (John R. Levine) (10/26/89)
From article <915@fiver.UUCP>, by palowoda@fiver.UUCP (Bob Palowoda): > Has anyone configured large NFS systems with DOS NFS 3.0 clients? > (NFS on a 386 type UNIX) I have used such a setup quite successfully. At a place where I consult we have a network of several dozen Suns of various types, with three (probably soon to be more) 386/ix machines, all NFS'ed together. With some relatively minor problems, it works out of the box. Problems include: -- 386/ix yellow pages doesn't exist yet. We kludged around that with some shell scripts to put the necessary entries into the local hosts and password files, and we statically mount the stuff in /vol and /home that is automounted on the Suns. -- 386/ix doesn't understand BSD filesystems. In particular, filenames with more than 14 characters and symbolic links don't work. -- 386/ix csh crashes when any component of the PATH is on a BSD filesystem, apparently because it doesn't know how to read a BSD directory. The Bourne and Korn shells work fine. -- We are using cruddy old 3com Ethernet interfaces with only one packet buffer, so we set the NFS transfer size to 1K rather than the usual 8K to avoid zillions of collisions. If we had boards with more buffers such as the WD8003, this probably would not be a problem. Even so, NFS performance is not bad. Since we got the network set up, it has worked reliably. I don't know how well it works to mount a 386/ix file system on a Sun, since we haven't had occasion to try it. Mounting a 386/ix file system on a PC with PC-NFS works, I do that at home. A 25 MHz 386/ix box is faster than a Sun 386i, and costs less, too. -- John R. Levine, Segue Software, POB 349, Cambridge MA 02238, +1 617 864 9650 johnl@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us, {ima|lotus|spdcc}!esegue!johnl Massachusetts has over 100,000 unlicensed drivers. -The Globe
dyer@spdcc.COM (Steve Dyer) (10/26/89)
In article <1989Oct26.130717.5942@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us> johnl@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us (John R. Levine) writes: >-- 386/ix doesn't understand BSD filesystems. In particular, filenames with >more than 14 characters and symbolic links don't work. I was quite surprised a few months ago when I was working on an RT running AIX 2.2.1, that while it didn't support filenames with >14 characters on its local filesystem, it treated long filenames found on NFS mounted BSD filesystems with complete equanimity, as did the application programs (such as ls, make, etc.) which had to use them as well. I guess it's a sign that it *can* be done. Not a bad hint for ISC. -- Steve Dyer dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer dyer@arktouros.mit.edu, dyer@hstbme.mit.edu
rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) (10/27/89)
dyer@spdcc.COM (Steve Dyer) writes: > ... johnl@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us (John R. Levine) writes: > >-- 386/ix doesn't understand BSD filesystems. In particular, filenames with > >more than 14 characters and symbolic links don't work. > > I was quite surprised a few months ago when I was working on an RT running > AIX 2.2.1, that while it didn't support filenames with >14 characters on its > local filesystem, it treated long filenames found on NFS mounted BSD > filesystems with complete equanimity, as did the application programs... > ...Not a bad hint for ISC. While it would be nice in some cases, it also introduces some problems. It's a minor win. IMHO, it's probably not worth the effort. (MHO is not ISC policy, BTW:-) If you're in a mixed BSD/SysV environment, it would allow you to reach out to files with long names. But you're going to have unhappy results if you start stirring those filenames into the local (SysV) environment, so it's likely to bite you sooner or later. There's also the matter of V.4 being just around the bend. I know, you don't want to be waiting around for some future release that hasn't even been announced...but think about the real value of the feature (as per previous paragraph) and the relatively short term over which it would matter...there are probably better things for us to spend our time on. (In other words, yes, if we had as much time as we needed and nothing else to do...which is like the joke about simplifying physics problems: "Given a frictionless elephant whose mass can be neglected...":-) -- Dick Dunn rcd@ico.isc.com uucp: {ncar,nbires}!ico!rcd (303)449-2870 ...No DOS. UNIX.