--- Gavin Scott <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Donna writes:
> > 4) if by some miracle your 'other systems' are mpe, you will get
> > better performance using dscopy, provided the files themselves
don't
> > make dscopy choke.  (are folks aware of this?  that good ol' dscopy

> > way out performs ftp??)
>
> Hmmm, all the tests I've ever done show FTP having about twice the
> throughput that :DSCOPY does (on a T1 speed WAN connection).

well, i was waxing poetic....and wasn't specific enough....

ftp's from mpe-to-mpe will perform slower than a dscopy.  dscopy (even
though it's showing it's age) was optimized for mpe, does block
transfers vs. ftp's character transfers.

i was joyfully beating programmers the other day (hey, it's the
holidays, right? :-) trying to get them to use ftp instead of dscopy.
when they proved (oh i hate that :-) that dscopy left ftp in it's
'dust' i was really suprised.           - d


=====
Donna Garverick     Sr. System Programmer
dgarverick -at- longs -dot- com
925-210-6631        Longs Drug Stores

Come, my friends, 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world.
Tho' much is taken, much abides; and tho'
We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are.
"Ulysses", A. Tennyson

>>>MY opinions, not Longs Drug Stores'<<<

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *