[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: aix-l
Subject: cachefs
From: Len Rugen <rugenl () MISSOURI ! EDU>
Date: 2005-07-27 1:33:18
Message-ID: 002801c5924b$2c01b8c0$90a14541 () optiplex110
[Download RAW message or body]
I tried using a nfs mount from a Solaris system for print submission "hotfolders", a \
technique that I hoped to use with InfoPrint AIX to avoid problems of the server \
being down at print job submit time.
We had about 400 directories on a single mount point, InfoPrint checkes each folder \
every 10 seconds, which can't be changed. Even though we weren't using them yet, \
just having them checked was a severe drain on the system. Just a df would hang for \
a minute or two on the nfs entry.
These folders would rarely change, even if all print came thru them, it would be \
100's of files per hour, not 1000's. Most of the traffic is just looking and finding \
nothing.
WOuld this be a candidate for cachefs? When the print server finds a file, it would \
process it then delete it quickly, not spool it to the printer from the nfs mount.
The recommendation is of course to have the hotfolders on the print server, exported \
to the print submitters, but that doesn't do much for redudancy. I'm trying to make \
a fairly reliable system of some dated hardware, it's a 4-way H50 driving about 400 \
printers.
[Attachment #3 (text/html)]
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1505" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I tried using a nfs mount from a Solaris system for
print submission "hotfolders", a technique that I hoped to use with InfoPrint
AIX to avoid problems of the server being down at print job submit time.
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>We had about 400 directories on a single mount
point, InfoPrint checkes each folder every 10 seconds, which can't be
changed. Even though we weren't using them yet, just having them checked
was a severe drain on the system. Just a df would hang for a minute or two
on the nfs entry. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>These folders would rarely change, even if all
print came thru them, it would be 100's of files per hour, not 1000's.
Most of the traffic is just looking and finding nothing. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>WOuld this be a candidate for cachefs? When
the print server finds a file, it would process it then delete it quickly, not
spool it to the printer from the nfs mount. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The recommendation is of course to have the
hotfolders on the print server, exported to the print submitters, but that
doesn't do much for redudancy. I'm trying to make a fairly reliable system
of some dated hardware, it's a 4-way H50 driving about 400 printers.
</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic