I'm new to Sun

[katz at rpal.com]

In article <460 at brchh104.bnr.ca> rutan at pcrl.sps.mot.com (Deborah Rutan) writes:

> One BIG question I have is whether or not having a dedicated file server
> (such as the SPARCserved 490) would benefit us.  
> 
> Our applications require very large files (10-20MB).  Having to get these
> over the network (which is what having a file server would do) does not
> sound like a very good idea to me.

There was a day when getting files over the network was faster than
getting them from the local disk because the fileserver disks were so much
faster than the local disks.  I would guess that this is no longer the
case; however, we find that accessing files locally on our 4/60's takes
roughly the same amount of time as accessing the data on NFS mounted file
systems to our 4/490.  Furthermore, I believe that Sun has made an
informal commitment to having remote access be no slower than 75% of the
performance to the local disk. 

I believe that the decision on whether to buy a 4/490 as a fileserver
should really be made based on the following criteria amongst others:

1) How much disk space do you need?  How much is it going to cost you per
   bit?
2) Do you need the reliability which comes from having a machine with ECC
   memory?
3) How are you going to do backups?  Are you going to want an 8mm or 1/2
   tape drive?  
4) Is there a soon to be announced fileserver which will look like a 4/490
   but have the Sparc 2 processor performance?

Morry Katz
Rockwell Science Center
administrator at rpal.com (machine administration issues)
katz at rpal.com (other)