> NFS is still twice as slow as FTP, but best with a r/w size of 8192. Screams for a kftpd ;) Jan Engelhardt -- | Alphagate Systems, http://alphagate.hopto.org/ | jengelh's site, http://jengelh.hopto.org/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- References:
- Kernel 2.6.15.1 + NFS is 4 times slower than FTP!?
- From: Justin Piszcz <[email protected]>
- Re: Kernel 2.6.15.1 + NFS is 4 times slower than FTP!?
- From: Phil Oester <[email protected]>
- Re: Kernel 2.6.15.1 + NFS is 4 times slower than FTP!?
- From: Justin Piszcz <[email protected]>
- Kernel 2.6.15.1 + NFS is 4 times slower than FTP!?
- Prev by Date: Re: RFC [patch 00/34] PID Virtualization Overview
- Next by Date: Re: [patch 2.6.15-current] i386: multi-column stack backtraces
- Previous by thread: Re: Kernel 2.6.15.1 + NFS is 4 times slower than FTP!?
- Next by thread: Re: Waiting for your responce and remain blessed.
- Index(es):
 |