hi,
Not sure if this is the right thread, but I though I'd put the question anyway.
I'm working with an architecture for an enterprise system. In the system we will have clients that need access to some very big files. I favored an architecture with a server which controls the security of connecting clients and serves up the files to them. Recently there has been concern over the server becoming a bottelneck in the system and an alternative has been suggested where the clients would remotely mount the disk containing files (ie no server). My question is in two parts really, if we use a server with very little processing (just serving up the data to the appropriate socket) is this really a potential bottleneck, I don't have much experience of server capacities? Also I have a bad feeling about the mounted disk solution regarding security but can put my finger on anything concrete, what are the concrete issues with mounting the file system remotely?
Thanks for any help.
Steve
Not sure if this is the right thread, but I though I'd put the question anyway.
I'm working with an architecture for an enterprise system. In the system we will have clients that need access to some very big files. I favored an architecture with a server which controls the security of connecting clients and serves up the files to them. Recently there has been concern over the server becoming a bottelneck in the system and an alternative has been suggested where the clients would remotely mount the disk containing files (ie no server). My question is in two parts really, if we use a server with very little processing (just serving up the data to the appropriate socket) is this really a potential bottleneck, I don't have much experience of server capacities? Also I have a bad feeling about the mounted disk solution regarding security but can put my finger on anything concrete, what are the concrete issues with mounting the file system remotely?
Thanks for any help.
Steve