Gawd, don't ask :)
We are using OSX Xserves. I seem to get nothing but grief from them. I'm
having a real problem with "delayed write failed" errors running the latest
10.3.3 release, and if I roll it back that error is not there, but all sorts
of performance related issues come up. NFS used to be no better on these,
but I may look at that next.
Of course I know the real answer is a NetApp or similar...
|-----Original Message-----
|From: Steve Kochak [mailto:steve@(email surpressed)]
|Sent: 14 May 2004 17:34
|To: void@(email surpressed)
|Subject: Re: Staggering render start times.
|
|[posted to rush.general]
|
|I used to use it with my Extreme Networks setup. However, in
|the end, I just ended up making my storage better. Which OS
|are you using for your fileserver(s)?
|
|
|
|Greg Ercolano wrote:
|> Greg Ercolano wrote:
|>
|>> If you've got a network large enough to where it slows your
|>> server down, you may want to consider some kind of network
|>> flow control at the switches, so that the workstations have
|>> higher priority to the network than the farm.
|>
|>
|> Many Cisco routers have this, BTW.
|>
|> They refer to this as QOS (Quality Of Service) prioritization.
|> There may be other terms for it.
|>
|> Made popular because of VoIP, and other high volume data
|> streaming apps.
|>
|> I believe some of the more sophisticated switches have
|> prioritization as well, where you can set priorities
|> at the individual ports, so that workstations and server
|> can be given higher priority than the farm.
|>
|> I don't know specifics, I just hear rumors ;)
|>
|> Has anyone on the group played with this stuff, and has
|> any stories to tell?
|>
|> I know some of my larger customers have played with that
|> stuff with success, but I've never received particular
|> hardware or 'best config' recommendations.
|
|