On Tue, Aug 06, 2002 at 12:37:57PM -0500, Karl Bongers wrote: > On Tue, Aug 06, 2002 at 10:34:46AM -0500, Florin Iucha wrote: > > 1. NFS is not "file transfer", it is "pieces of file transfer". > > Probably the most used RPCs are read(handle, offset, size) and > > write(handle, offset, size). > > Good points. Probably a good argument against using NFS to transfer > those 500MB files(A dedicated "file transfer" protocol should be > a more optimized solution that will run faster.) Silly me, what was > I thinking, using a network file system to transfer files over the > network :) Uhm... why? FTP and cp over NFS do the same thing modulo setting up and tearing down the "connection", which has negligible cost compared with transfering 500 Mb. florin -- "If it's not broken, let's fix it till it is." 41A9 2BDE 8E11 F1C5 87A6 03EE 34B3 E075 3B90 DFE4 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://shadowknight.real-time.com/pipermail/tclug-list/attachments/20020806/8fe2d654/attachment.pgp