× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



" IFS is slow by comparison to other file systems, that's a known fact. "

What exactly do you mean by "IFS" in that sentence? Do you actually mean NetServer?



-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Oberholtzer [mailto:midrangel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 9:35 AM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: NFS as IFS replacement?

Good questions Patrik.

IFS is slow by comparison to other file systems, that's a known fact. It is also more securable that other file systems.
So do you gain speed by using NFS or simply trade the IFS performance for the overhead of the NFS? My guess is it's an even trade, although I have not tested it with sufficient volume to know.
NFS also implies a careful job of maintaining the UID/GID for each user across both systems. That can become tedious leading to massive security holes.

Net/Net: I would not trade IFS for NFS mount, unless it avoids duplicating
data, and the primary user of that data is on the other system. It just
does not seem to provide any real benefit, and adds complexity.


Jim Oberholtzer
Chief Technical Architect
Agile Technology Architects


On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 8:23 AM Patrik Schindler <poc@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hello Roberto,

Am 13.11.2019 um 13:20 schrieb Roberto José Etcheverry Romero <
yggdrasil.raiker@xxxxxxxxx>:

Is NFS a good replacement for having all the files in the IFS? or
what would be a good way to take the IFS out of the i but still use
it from
the
i with minimal application changes?

Question back: What's so bad in IFS to move files out to NFS? What's
the alternative (NFS server platform)? And which benefits do you expect?

Besides, moving Data from a local to a remote mountpoint is
transparent, so there should no changes be necessary.

:wq! PoC

PGP-Key: DDD3 4ABF 6413 38DE - https://www.pocnet.net/poc-key.asc

--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
list To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To
subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at
https://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.

Please contact support@xxxxxxxxxxxx for any subscription related
questions.

Help support midrange.com by shopping at amazon.com with our affiliate
link: https://amazon.midrange.com



As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:
Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.