From owner-freebsd-current  Fri Jan 14 21:41:21 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from goofy.zort.on.ca (cr575310-a.shprd1.on.wave.home.com [24.112.185.167])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50F8614FA9
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Fri, 14 Jan 2000 21:41:16 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from rod@zort.on.ca)
Received: from rbtBSD.intranet (rbtBSD.zort.on.ca [10.0.0.50])
	by goofy.zort.on.ca (Postfix) with SMTP
	id 69265256; Sat, 15 Jan 2000 00:42:09 -0500 (EST)
From: Rod Taylor <rod@zort.on.ca>
Reply-To: rod@zort.on.ca
Organization: Zort
To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>,
	freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Thoughts...
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2000 00:34:26 -0500
X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.28]
Content-Type: text/plain
References: <0001150016090H.04098@rbtBSD.intranet> <200001150524.VAA95920@apollo.backplane.com>
In-Reply-To: <200001150524.VAA95920@apollo.backplane.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <0001150041180I.04098@rbtBSD.intranet>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

The main reason for choosing Coda was inteed

On Sat, 15 Jan 2000, you wrote:
> :[  -current seemed like the best place to put this as I suspect thats what I'll
> :be using for the various NFS & linux compat updates.]

>     Generally speaking if you limit the functionality of the servers,
>     it should be possible to depend on them being up.

I've not used NFS heavily in -current.  Sounds like a lot of work has been put
into it.

>     You have to consider the network-disconnect case:  Will CODA really 
>     result in the clients still being useable or is it a pipedream for
>     the type of work being done on them?  If the network-disconnect case
>     would cause too much trouble, then using CODA will not give you any
>     advantages.

Hmm.. My main thoughts for this was the hoarding issue.  As the school would
like to allow students to 'link up' via laptops and have them synchronized via
the same mechanism.

Their current solution is to copy a 1.8GB disk image across the network onto
the drives and use that as a normal local disk.  The copy time takes several
minutes.  If for some reason 50 people decided to do this at the same time you
could see where some network lag would come from.

The other reason has to do with the laggy network and booting off it.  The
things not even 10MB switched per station.  8 workstations share 10mbit hubs. 
Netscape for example would take ages to load over NFS that way.  (Afterall, in
a class like that they tend to do everything in unison).

Mounting / under NFS on the other hand doesn't appear that it would be trouble.
It's /usr/local/bin that could use a little local caching.

>     In terms of disk space and NFS -- you have to decide what you want to
>     put on those 1.8GB drives.  E.G. do you use them just for swap?  Do
>     you put a minimal system on them (potentially synchronized via NFS?),
>     is security an issue (a reason for booting entirely via read-only NFS
>     mounts for / and /usr), and so forth.

-- 
Rod Taylor
Partner of Zort (zort.on.ca)
--


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message