Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2012 15:26:02 +0300 From: Beeblebrox <zaphod@berentweb.com> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: lagg problems on diskless client Message-ID: <CAPSTskvD5xMPOwWhn_Dr6FHJBK6YTeH2mspEDw89p_n=sX_-mQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAN6yY1sTAWb5JACT_tmujJUhsFo0yGL85XGKdtjqMxpVMfT5Dw@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAPSTskviJ26uuoAhRVN7tLBj7AhAPVuQz5GSBCd%2BszGPF2VOfw@mail.gmail.com> <20120329072054.GA45082@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <CAPSTsktpDXHXDR1-MgWBZRTwXvHGrdZ=g5wH-=Lkd-JwMmJ95A@mail.gmail.com> <20120403074954.GA19241@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <CAPSTskueYtD%2B=zdwLFJkTvxHPXnpDvb4SQGHsb=RA8vq6iiewQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAPSTskvbj%2BV6Q2XvPHS%2BogjSWEzk5CM5TRHgW94Kt-u6o8vt9w@mail.gmail.com> <CAN6yY1ujiGzexDe2Fxe=B_7w2agh5uVPn5AQ%2B7tvtd%2B5VMhgxA@mail.gmail.com> <CAPSTsktiQqkjNL0JntOcap1Z4QLg7AviDVjKaz7s8g5%2Biyp5Nw@mail.gmail.com> <CAN6yY1sTAWb5JACT_tmujJUhsFo0yGL85XGKdtjqMxpVMfT5Dw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > Almost as bad as back when I sent a note to a customer about a > requirement to adjust our 'peeing' policy. (And the spell checker > won't catch that one.) > > On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 10:29 AM, Beeblebrox <zaphod@berentweb.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 7:46 PM, Kevin Oberman <kob6558@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 4:51 AM, Beeblebrox <zaphod@berentweb.com> > wrote: > >> > Slightly different point of view: Under this scenario of dikless > clients > >> > having dual NICs would CRAP be a choice to consider? From what I have > >> read > >> Typo or editorial comment^^^^^^ -) > >> > it can offer loadbalancing but as I understand it's not really > applicable > >> > to diskless node situations? > @ Kevin: > Does a 'dikless' server run eunichs? Sorry. I really should resist this kind of carp. One could assert that all forms of harem *gateway* control were eunichs-based. However, after a compound slip-up like that, there's no graceful recovery: pwned, I am. @Peter: Thanks for the explanation on carp, confirmed my understanding of its function. > Actually, it doesn't matter that the root is RO, just that /mnt exists so it can be used as a mountpoint. Why the error and why does it freeze the system then? More than happy just to go with default /mnt but the DC does not like it for some odd reason. > whilst $lagg_tmp is parameterised, /mnt is hard-coded in several places No big deal, easily corrected on my end. > AFAIR, I use a separate ramdisk because /etc/rc.d/lagg runs very early and other mountpoints cannot be relied on. Do you mean like a usb flash?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAPSTskvD5xMPOwWhn_Dr6FHJBK6YTeH2mspEDw89p_n=sX_-mQ>