rsh

Trent Piepho xyzzy at speakeasy.org
Wed Sep 24 00:23:50 EDT 2003


On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, Robert G. Brown wrote:
> > 
> > About one order of magnitude slower, and a great deal more cpu time.
> 
> But still pretty much negligible, on a job intended to run all day.

True, but what about interactive tasks?  Say I want to run uptime or netstat
or lilo, or some other simple command on all the nodes of a 100 node cluster. 
Doing it via rsh would take 3 seconds, via ssh 40.  That's a big difference
when you are waiting for the results.

> I suppose in the case of the 65 GB of data you could just NFS export,
> mount, and copy (depending on just how thin the client was).  NFS isn't
> lightning fast, but one can move data through it at a respectable rate

Exactly what I did.  My thin client has a hard drive with a RH9 install, since
I used it to develop the system used on the real thin clients, that only have
a 32MB flash module.

> (less than all day).  And yeah, enabling rsh/rcp long enough to
> facilitate the transfer might be easier/faster.

I tried that first, but rcp barfed on the files larger than 2GB!

_______________________________________________
Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org
To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf



More information about the Beowulf mailing list