From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 09 Jan 2011 22:58:22 GMT." <29b978fe012ed0d2ebb1b8dca8d3acde@terzarima.net> References: <29b978fe012ed0d2ebb1b8dca8d3acde@terzarima.net> From: Bakul Shah Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2011 19:26:48 -0800 Message-Id: <20110110032648.3E74E5B42@mail.bitblocks.com> Subject: Re: [9fans] fs performance Topicbox-Message-UUID: 933d698c-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Sun, 09 Jan 2011 22:58:22 GMT Charles Forsyth wrote: > it's curious that people are still worrying about "local" file systems > when so much of most people's data increasingly is miles > away on Google, S3, S3 via Drop Box, etc, which model is closer if anything t > o the > original plan 9 model of dedicated file servers than the > unix/linux model of "the whole world is in the box in front of you". Peak Local file access bandwidth is typically 50 to 100 MBPs x number of disks; over the localnet it is about 80MBps. On my internet connection I barely get 1MBps download (& 0.2MBps upload) speeds. Not to mention server side slowdowns, loss of control over one's files, sites you download from don't always stick around (or change) etc. etc. So I mostly use local filesystems (as in on the same box or on a local network) & that is where my interest lies.