From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <81d2f74446228639a464c558e01ee9a1@juice.thebigchoice.com>
From: matt@proweb.co.uk
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: RE: [9fans] General Question re Plan9 and wise hardware use
In-Reply-To: <004001c3d90b$97b8bc80$a8079486@RonRoberts>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 15:12:14 +0000
Topicbox-Message-UUID: b7bb482e-eacc-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

While I agree that for multi-users where one will be cpu-ing to the server and running tasks there that slow terminals makes sense but my experience here as a single user made me make those assertions.

I ran an 800Mhz duron as the server and a 75Mhz Pentium as my diskless terminal.

The server mainly processes mail and serves as a gateway via 9fs to the remote servers via ftpfs & 9fs whereas my terminal runs rio, acme, anti-aliased fonts, multiple vnc windows, faces etc.

the p75 was a bit painful as my terminal. I did try it with cpu-ing to the Duron and running rio there but then the plumbing messed up and some other things messed up with regard to where files were expected to be and I didn't get a great overall improvement.

Swapping them over has solved all of the problems. My server does crawl a bit when I run my spam-deleting script (it only has 64Mb of ram!) but my terminal fair flies along, even in 1280x1024x16.

m