No, it means the performance advantage is less than if you did not do so.
The whole idea behind running a client is to take as much of the load off
the NetView server, over running a telnet session from the remote box, and
move it to the client. The biggest load is in supporting the GUI, that is
how the NetView client was born. You take as many of the X resources used
to display the GUI and move them to the client. But if you NFS mount the
maps then you have that overhead -- the NFS traffic to support the single
exported map database -- on the server, so you have less overall savings in
memory and cpu (and network bandwidth) than if the client had only a local
map. But you pay for that lower overhead by having a bigger administrative
problem by having distinct maps that can get out of sync.
But I thought you were not doing this for performance in the first place.
Did that change?
James Shanks
Team Leader, Level 3 Support
Tivoli NetView for UNIX and NT
"Scott Bursik" <nv_list@HOTMAIL.COM>@tkg.com on 04/09/2001 02:24:23 PM
Please respond to IBM NetView Discussion <nv-l@tkg.com>
Sent by: owner-nv-l@tkg.com
To: nv-l@tkg.com
cc:
Subject: [NV-L] NetView Client Question
I am using AIX 4.3.2 with NetView 6.0.2
I have a question about the following line in the manula:
You can NFS mount your map database if you want all your maps to
reside on the server machine. In this case, making changes to all the
maps is easier because they are all in one place physically. Everyone
can use the same set of maps. However, if the map database is on
the server, you are not offloading that memory utilization onto the
clients.
Does this mean that there is no advantage to running this type of
configuration?
Thanks,
Scott Bursik
Pepsico Business Solutions Group
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
_________________________________________________________________________
NV-L List information and Archives: http://www.tkg.com/nv-l
|