> Once, it used to be the "standard" configuration to have one machine as a > CPU/auth server, one machine as a file server, and one machine as a > "terminal", for a total of three systems, if one had the available hardware.
The power in that model comes primarily when you have a number of terminals being supported by the file and cpu/auth servers. Throwing bigger disks on the file server gives everyone more space. Upgrading the big honkin' cpu server gives everyone a speed boost. Of course, these days, a $400 laptop is more honkin' (in many ways) than big systems of just a few years ago. Still the separation of functionality does have advantages. But I digress... > What's the "recommended" setup now? Are most people using a combined > cpu/auth/file server running Fossil+Venti, or is the recommendation to use a > seperate fossil+venti server dedicated to file serving, and another to serve > as CPU/auth? Currently, I'm running a combined file/cpu/auth server, and I run 9vx in FreeBSD as a terminal connecting to my server. While not mentioned often, 9vx has a -b option that allows you to point it to a file server the same way a terminal does. I can also cpu into the cpu server just like with a real terminal. And when I'm away from home with my laptop, I can still run 9vx with a local file system. As soon as my supply of round tuits is replinished, I intend to put a CPU server in place. BLS
