Advertisement
Advanced thin client solution for Linux, based on Open Source. Mix Windows and Linux applications on the same desktop.
Sponsored link
Serve your customers, not your servers, with VERIO Linux VPS. Full-access test-drive here.
| Weekly edition | Kernel | Security | Distributions | Search |
| Archives | Calendar | Subscribe | Write for LWN | LWN.net FAQ |
Windows Server 2003 better than Linux (Inquirer)
Windows Server 2003 better than Linux (Inquirer)
Posted May 8, 2003 0:59 UTC (Thu) by alan (subscriber, #4018)In reply to: Windows Server 2003 better than Linux (Inquirer) by elanthis
Parent article: Windows Server 2003 better than Linux (Inquirer)
hrrm,. samba client and server I thought. smbfs has nothing to do with the on disk filesystem. I'm simply noting that they compared fileserving performance. I am less interested than the previous poster was about the ondisk filesystem format because using the kernel smbfs support would enhance fileserving performance,. which is what was actually being compared.
(Log in to post comments)