Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.networking > #4711 > unrolled thread

What networked filesystem to use

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.networking

Contents

  What networked filesystem to use Harold Johanssen <noemail@please.net> - 2020-11-25 18:00 +0000
    Re: What networked filesystem to use Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2020-11-25 20:17 +0200
    Re: What networked filesystem to use Scott Hemphill <hemphill@hemphills.net> - 2020-11-25 13:45 -0500
    Re: What networked filesystem to use Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-11-25 12:20 -0700
    Re: What networked filesystem to use Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-11-25 12:21 -0700
    Re: What networked filesystem to use David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-11-25 20:32 +0100
      Re: What networked filesystem to use William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2020-11-25 21:19 +0000
    Re: What networked filesystem to use Harold Johanssen <noemail@please.net> - 2020-11-25 20:26 +0000
      Re: What networked filesystem to use Scott Hemphill <hemphill@hemphills.net> - 2020-11-25 17:21 -0500
      Re: What networked filesystem to use "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-11-26 00:04 +0100
        Re: What networked filesystem to use Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2020-11-26 07:27 +0000
          Re: What networked filesystem to use William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2020-11-27 16:21 +0000
            Re: What networked filesystem to use "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-11-27 20:22 +0100
        Re: What networked filesystem to use David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-11-26 09:22 +0100
          Re: What networked filesystem to use Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2020-11-27 22:37 -0800
            Re: What networked filesystem to use David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-11-28 16:22 +0100
              Re: What networked filesystem to use Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2020-11-28 12:37 -0800
                Re: What networked filesystem to use David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-11-29 13:26 +0100
                  Re: What networked filesystem to use Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2020-11-29 10:44 -0800
                    Re: What networked filesystem to use William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2020-11-29 19:33 +0000
                      Re: What networked filesystem to use Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2020-11-29 13:59 -0800
                    Re: What networked filesystem to use David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-11-29 22:02 +0100
                      Re: What networked filesystem to use Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2020-11-29 14:01 -0800
                        Re: What networked filesystem to use David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-11-29 23:39 +0100
    Re: What networked filesystem to use "Tristan B. Kildaire" <deavmi@redxen.eu> - 2021-01-18 14:04 +0200
      Re: What networked filesystem to use Jim Jackson <jj@franjam.org.uk> - 2021-01-18 17:57 +0000
    Re: What networked filesystem to use William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2021-01-18 18:21 +0000

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#4746

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 11/29/20 11:33 AM, William Unruh wrote:

>>> =20
>>> The switches that existed when hubs were popular were massively
>>> expensive.  And no switch has ever cost $10 - excluding thrown-out
>                                                  ^^^^^^^^^
>>> second-hand devices that would not be used in a serious network.
>>> =20
>>
>> Be careful when making absolute claims. You said no switch, including
>                                                               ^^^^^^^^^
>> thrown-out second hand devices....
>>
>> https://www.ebay.com/itm/HP-Procurve-2610-48-J9088A-48-Port-10-100-1000-E=
>> thernet-Switch/274592476654?hash=3Ditem3feefcadee:g:3sUAAOSw~kFfwUyq
>>
>> $10 opening bid (which means it MIGHT sell for $10.)
>>


DOH. I did totally misread that..  Although that HP switch is definitely
capable of working on a serious network as it is 10/100/1000

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4745

On 29/11/2020 19:44, Johann Beretta wrote:
> On 11/29/20 4:26 AM, David Brown wrote:
>> On 28/11/2020 21:37, Johann Beretta wrote:
>>> On 11/28/20 7:22 AM, David Brown wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I suspect that in older networks, you might still find a few hubs -
>>>> equipment like this rarely gets replaced unless there is a problem, and
>>>> just like old wiring, there is often old equipment still in use.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Nah... A switch can be had for $10 and have been in production for far
>>> longer than hubs.
>>
>> The switches that existed when hubs were popular were massively
>> expensive.  And no switch has ever cost $10 - excluding thrown-out
>> second-hand devices that would not be used in a serious network.
>>
> 
> Be careful when making absolute claims. You said no switch, including
> thrown-out second hand devices....
> 
> https://www.ebay.com/itm/HP-Procurve-2610-48-J9088A-48-Port-10-100-1000-Ethernet-Switch/274592476654?hash=item3feefcadee:g:3sUAAOSw~kFfwUyq
> 
> $10 opening bid (which means it MIGHT sell for $10.)
> 

Yes - it's an old used, second-hand device, as I said.

But I was perhaps a bit quick in suggesting that no one would buy such a
device for a serious network.  When a new 48 port switch can be bought
for as little as about $100, I don't think companies would want to get
critical infrastructure as left-overs found cheaply on Ebay.  However,
it is entirely possible that someone would want this particular type of
switch to replace an existing one, and buy it for the model rather than
for the price.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4747

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 11/29/20 1:02 PM, David Brown wrote:

> Yes - it's an old used, second-hand device, as I said.

I know. I misread "excluding" as "including". Mea culpa

> 
> But I was perhaps a bit quick in suggesting that no one would buy such a
> device for a serious network.  When a new 48 port switch can be bought
> for as little as about $100, I don't think companies would want to get
> critical infrastructure as left-overs found cheaply on Ebay.  However,
> it is entirely possible that someone would want this particular type of
> switch to replace an existing one, and buy it for the model rather than
> for the price.
> 
> 

Agreed.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4748

On 29/11/2020 23:01, Johann Beretta wrote:
> On 11/29/20 1:02 PM, David Brown wrote:
> 
>> Yes - it's an old used, second-hand device, as I said.
> 
> I know. I misread "excluding" as "including". Mea culpa

No problem.  ("Mea culpa" is a rarely used phrase on Usenet!)

> 
>>
>> But I was perhaps a bit quick in suggesting that no one would buy such a
>> device for a serious network.  When a new 48 port switch can be bought
>> for as little as about $100, I don't think companies would want to get
>> critical infrastructure as left-overs found cheaply on Ebay.  However,
>> it is entirely possible that someone would want this particular type of
>> switch to replace an existing one, and buy it for the model rather than
>> for the price.
> 
> Agreed.
> 

It's also worth noting that while a little long in the tooth, the HP
switch is a managed switch with more features than the cheap unmanaged
48 port device I found.  And the modern replacement for the HP 2610-48
is, as far as I can see, the HP 2620-48 with a new price of about $1800
(that's Norway prices, which might be higher than you see in other
countries).  I don't know what that switch does more than you'd get from
a new D-Link DGS-1210-48 managed switch for about $350, but I've never
really understood how some manufacturers seem to charge huge prices for
network equipment.  (And these same HPE folk make some wonderful little
microservers at entirely reasonable prices.)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4789

Harold Johanssen wrote:
> 	I have a setup in which my system has a limited amount of disk
> space, but I am in a network with access to a server with all but
> infinite amounts of disk space available. I need to use my system to
> carry out lengthy software compilations, the kind that takes lots of disk
> space. I therefore have to access disk space from the server above over
> the 100 Mb LAN.
> 
> 	My question would be, What filesystem is likely to deliver the
> best performance under the circumstances described?
> 
> 	I have tried with NFS, and it is not great. I will try next SSHFS
> and WebDAV, but if anybody has experience with these, and other networked
> filesystems, your feedback would be much appreciated.
> 
You might hate me for this, sshfs

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4790

On 2021-01-18, Tristan B. Kildaire <deavmi@redxen.eu> wrote:
> Harold Johanssen wrote:
>> I have a setup in which my system has a limited amount of disk
>> space, but I am in a network with access to a server with all but
>> infinite amounts of disk space available. I need to use my system to
>> carry out lengthy software compilations, the kind that takes lots of disk
>> space. I therefore have to access disk space from the server above over
>> the 100 Mb LAN.
>> 
>> My question would be, What filesystem is likely to deliver the
>> best performance under the circumstances described?
>> 
>> I have tried with NFS, and it is not great. I will try next SSHFS
>> and WebDAV, but if anybody has experience with these, and other networked
>> filesystems, your feedback would be much appreciated.
>> 
> You might hate me for this, sshfs

I use sshfs regularly - but the performance is not good.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4791

On 2020-11-25, Harold Johanssen <noemail@please.net> wrote:
> 	I have a setup in which my system has a limited amount of disk 
> space, but I am in a network with access to a server with all but 
> infinite amounts of disk space available. I need to use my system to 
> carry out lengthy software compilations, the kind that takes lots of disk 
> space. I therefore have to access disk space from the server above over 
> the 100 Mb LAN.
>
> 	My question would be, What filesystem is likely to deliver the 
> best performance under the circumstances described?
>
> 	I have tried with NFS, and it is not great. I will try next SSHFS 
> and WebDAV, but if anybody has experience with these, and other networked 
> filesystems, your feedback would be much appreciated.

I have no idea what "not great" means. eo  have a 100Mb/s ethernet, that
is about 10MB/s maximum, which is usually more like 1-5MB/s (remember
b=bits, and B=bytes, with a ratio of about 10 between them.) I suspect
that is the blockage and anything else is going add additional overhead
and slow things down more. sshfs has the advantage of encrytion in
flight, so if you are worried about someone hacking your connection
between your computer and the server, that may be a good idea. On the
other hand if it is inside your home, and you are worried about hackers,
maybe you have more severe problems than networking. If the server is
remote, then you have the problems of all of the routers between you and
the server slowing things down still more.
Buy another disk for your computer.

Note that software compilations are horrible to do with remote storage.
You want a local disk, preferably an SSD. There is far too much data churn in
compilations.


>

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.networking

csiph-web