[nycbug-talk] Lab environment
ike at lesmuug.org
Wed May 19 22:40:59 EDT 2004
Hi Sunny, All,
Sunny- be sure to hit the bottom of this post,
On May 19, 2004, at 9:01 PM, Sunny Dubey wrote:
>> One problem is that if we do want to include AFS,
> Are we speaking Andrew File System (IBM/Carnegie-Mellon) or something
> Apple's ?
To clarify for the list:
It seems apple has begun calling AFS AFP, (it seems to have been called
AFS back when the transition from Appletalk to TCP/IP was happening,
but they changed it, likely due to pre-existing Andrew), so this is my
"An Andrew file system (AFS) is a location-independent file system that
uses a local cache to reduce the workload and increase the performance
of a distributed computing environment. A first request for data to a
server from a workstation is satisfied by the server and placed in a
local cache. A second request for the same data is satisfied from the
Which is mentioned on the apple developer site at the bottom of this
To clarify for Sunny, per last week's discussion on common file
protocols, we do indeed mean Apple Filing Protocol.
Unless you want to head up the Andrew File System end of things, (on
various BSD's), I'm thinking I'm personally not too interested in
working with it at the moment- though it does look quite interesting.
> Well, I spoke to a friend of mine. He is a fellow Mandrake user, and
> he is
> also the primary admin of one of the largest clusters in the world
> He says the best way to test two different architectures for something
> this is by price.
> Yeah, doing it by price seems somewhat weird. But essentially its too
> difficult for numerous reasons to compare different OSes on different
> targets. So if you have 2 grand, which combination will give you the
> biggest bang for your buck ?
Understandable- but let me explain some of the objectives here-
Raw performance is something which is definitely hard to quantify
across architectures, and IMHO, is a loosing battle due to the insane
number of variables involved- (chip architecture optomization, network
interfaces, switches, routing, cable length, power fluctuations,
operating temperature, other network traffic, etc...).
Various protocols may 'perform' radically differently by shuffling
So, here's the deal- this test is going to have to be more about
operational comparison; qualities which are hard and unnecessary to
quantify, with no aim of deciding on a 'winner'.
Some protocols will have cool strengths and I think we can all learn
something by setting up a bunch of them side by side. Some thoughts
- Sanity of setup and administration across various architectures
- Network Verbosity vs. ease of use
- Implimentation Sanity for different architectures, (i.e. perhaps, for
example, the native SMB implementation on a given platform sucks, while
it's awesome on a different platform)
- General End User Experience (i.e. start a server runing one of the
services, and test several laptops using the service with different
- General NAS Use Experience
I think from this kind of testing, we can come up with a boatload of
really useful information- but I believe it would be a real waste of
time to run this benchmark style, even as the same hardware can perform
very differently with different *nixes.
> He also says that while pricing might be the fairest approach,
Dig- I'll check the couch for some testing budget ;)
Sunny- since your a Mandrake user, and a very knowledgeable Linux user
and developer, would you be interested in participating and following
our testing with a Linux or a few relevant Linuxes of your choosing?
It is outside of our scope to be able to include a Linux as anything
more than perhaps a client in our test network, but it would be a
fantastic learning experience for all of us if you could participate
and bring a Linux point of view to our testing. (unless you feel that
the administrative and etc... type comparisons would be fairly similar
across platforms, since we're all *nix, with X11 all around...) I'm
looking to emphasize any difference in process and use which we can all
More information about the talk