but the problem is i dont know what to get. should i go for the full 120 or just stick with 80 or something?
FirestormXIII wrote:Wow, he's not kidding. Looks like we've got a 733t HaXX0r on our hands here...
trythil@lothlann media $ df
Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on
/dev/hda6 1734348 115804 1618544 7% /
tmpfs 1024 156 868 16% /mnt/.init.d
/dev/hde2 4955412 2950796 2004616 60% /usr
/dev/hda7 1942556 193624 1748932 10% /var
/dev/hde3 4947380 1640716 3306664 34% /home
/dev/hdf1 80408392 35068352 45340040 44% /media
/dev/hde1 9958552 6597568 3360984 67% /mnt/windows_e
/dev/hda1 4192752 3209664 983088 77% /mnt/windows_c
//jupiter/jupiter_d 17912320 9466880 8445440 53% /mnt/jupiter_d
I have an 870 exabyte NAS. I'm not joking.
trythil@lothlann Downloads $ time cp j2sdk-1_4_0-forte-ce-3_0-bin-win.exe ~
real 0m11.893s
user 0m0.010s
sys 0m1.580s
trythil@lothlann Downloads $ ls -l j2sdk-1_4_0-forte-ce-3_0-bin-win.exe
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 66656883 May 11 00:33 j2sdk-1_4_0-forte-ce-3_0-bin-win.exe
trythil@lothlann Downloads $ pwd
/mnt/jupiter_d/Downloads
trythil@lothlann Downloads $ mount | grep jupiter_d
//jupiter/jupiter_d on /mnt/jupiter_d type smbfs (0
trythil wrote:Actually, a network file server isn't really such a bad idea. Using a switched Fast Ethernet network will bring you good results, and building a file server is cheap.
As an example...
Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on
/dev/hda6 1734348 115804 1618544 7% /
tmpfs 1024 156 868 16% /mnt/.init.d
/dev/hde2 4955412 2950796 2004616 60% /usr
/dev/hda7 1942556 193624 1748932 10% /var
/dev/hde3 4947380 1705868 3241512 35% /home
/dev/hdf1 80408392 35068352 45340040 44% /media
/dev/hde1 9958552 6597568 3360984 67% /mnt/windows_e
/dev/hda1 4192752 3209664 983088 77% /mnt/windows_c
//jupiter/jupiter_d 17912320 9466880 8445440 53% /mnt/jupiter_d
//earth/earth_e 60049408 50129920 9919488 84% /mnt/earth_e
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest