Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 13 Sep 1996 22:35:07 -0700 (PDT)
From:      Doug White <>
To:        Nik Clayton <>
Subject:   Re: SAMBA performance?
Message-ID:  <>
In-Reply-To: <>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On Fri, 13 Sep 1996, Nik Clayton wrote:

> Anyone using SAMBA got any comments about it's performance? I'm about to 
> build a W95 box that will need roughly 3GB HD. Due to market forces, it
> works out cheaper to buy a 4.4GB HD and leave a quarter of it unused.

>From what it sounds like from this list, samba is *excellent*.  Very high
performace as compared to NFS.  Everyone who's said something about
samba's had something good to say.  

> Is SAMBA's performance good enough that I could put the 4.4GB on one of
> my FreeBSD servers, use 1GB for Unix related bits and pieces, and the other
> 3GB for W95?

Ehhh?  You can't run Samba and Win95 at the same time.

> The W95 machine will be running MS Access, and probably MS J++ as well, so
> I anticipate it being fairly IO bound.

Go SCSI, then.

Doug White                              | University of Oregon  
Internet:    | Residence Networking Assistant    | Computer Science Major

Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <>