> :> Sometimes we just want to nfs-mount things on the same
> :> machine.
> :
> :Sick, poor in performance and the wrong tool for the job.
> :See mount_null(8) for more details on how to do it right.
> :
> :>
> :> One more example: I don't like /var/news so I mount locally
> :> /var/news
> :> t
:> Sometimes we just want to nfs-mount things on the same
:> machine.
:
:Sick, poor in performance and the wrong tool for the job.
:See mount_null(8) for more details on how to do it right.
:
:>
:> One more example: I don't like /var/news so I mount locally
:> /var/news
:> to /archive/news on t
>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 16:54:21 +1100 (EST)
>From: Tony Maher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Sick, poor in performance and the wrong tool for the job.
>> See mount_null(8) for more details on how to do it right.
>Yes its perfect for the job apart from:
>man mount_null
> THIS FILESYSTEM TYPE IS NOT
> "Rodney W. Grimes" wrote:
> ...
> >
> > Independent of order of export/mounting the dead lock occurs. Cross
> > mounting via NFS is a verbotten thing in the sysadmin world of production
> > systems. :-) I have had to fix it at several sites admin'd by newbies...
> >
>
> I'm not sure you ar
> Sick, poor in performance and the wrong tool for the job.
> See mount_null(8) for more details on how to do it right.
Yes its perfect for the job apart from:
man mount_null
THIS FILESYSTEM TYPE IS NOT YET FULLY SUPPORTED (READ: IT DOESN'T WORK)
AND USING IT MAY, IN FACT, DESTROY DATA O
"Rodney W. Grimes" wrote:
...
>
> Independent of order of export/mounting the dead lock occurs. Cross
> mounting via NFS is a verbotten thing in the sysadmin world of production
> systems. :-) I have had to fix it at several sites admin'd by newbies...
>
I'm not sure you are really understan
"Rodney W. Grimes" wrote:
> > "Rodney W. Grimes" wrote:
> > [..]
> > > So no disk, so just what is it that you are exporting???
> >
> > Just a comment:
> >
> > I've seen scenarios where a local disk is attached holding a kernel,
> > bootblocks loader etc, but otherwise booting from a server over
> If your talking about dead lock caused by mutual cross mounting
> between 2 systems via NFS the NFS rule book says ``don't do that,
> it hurts''.
>
> Independent of order of export/mounting the dead lock occurs. Cross
> mounting via NFS is a verbotten thing in the sysadmin world of production
> "Rodney W. Grimes" wrote:
> [..]
> > So no disk, so just what is it that you are exporting???
>
> Just a comment:
>
> I've seen scenarios where a local disk is attached holding a kernel,
> bootblocks loader etc, but otherwise booting from a server over NFS. And
> it exported the rest of it's
> On Wed, Jan 12, 2000 at 01:23:14AM -0800, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
>
> > Also moving them to pass1 would bring up nfs exports before we
> > brought up nfs mounts. syslogd would not be running to catch
>
> Shouldn't nfs exports happen before nfs mounts, so that machines
> which have nfs interde
> I've got a loopback mount in /var/db/mounttab that looks like this:
>
> 946789037 localhost /null
>
> which is there because I run cfs (a crypto file system; see
> /usr/ports/security/cfs). Part of the cfs startup script does
> this:
>
>/usr/local/sbin/cfsd && mount -o port
> What's all this about loopback mounts in fstab about? What does
> that have to do with diskless startup?
I've got a loopback mount in /var/db/mounttab that looks like this:
946789037 localhost /null
which is there because I run cfs (a crypto file system; see
/usr/ports/
"Rodney W. Grimes" wrote:
[..]
> So no disk, so just what is it that you are exporting???
Just a comment:
I've seen scenarios where a local disk is attached holding a kernel,
bootblocks loader etc, but otherwise booting from a server over NFS. And
it exported the rest of it's disk for general u
On Wed, Jan 12, 2000 at 01:23:14AM -0800, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
> Also moving them to pass1 would bring up nfs exports before we
> brought up nfs mounts. syslogd would not be running to catch
Shouldn't nfs exports happen before nfs mounts, so that machines
which have nfs interdependencies don
>
> Hi,
>
> > should not have to run either, *even* for diskless boot.
> >
> > What's all this about loopback mounts in fstab about? What does
> > that have to do with diskless startup?
>
> Ok. I just rethought everything. It seems that a move is
> unnecessary because:
>
> - Shar
Hi,
> should not have to run either, *even* for diskless boot.
>
> What's all this about loopback mounts in fstab about? What does
> that have to do with diskless startup?
Ok. I just rethought everything. It seems that a move is
unnecessary because:
- Sharity light and cfs are st
:> > portmap(8) and therefore mountd(8) should be started before
:> > the nfs filesystems get mounted. But because portmap(8) is in
:> > /usr/sbin , users with a nfs mounted /usr filesystem or with
:> > diskless filesystems will have big problems.
:
:I mean, that if I do the change of startup-ord
>
> > > portmap(8) and therefore mountd(8) should be started before
> > > the nfs filesystems get mounted. But because portmap(8) is in
> > > /usr/sbin , users with a nfs mounted /usr filesystem or with
> > > diskless filesystems will have big problems.
>
> I mean, that if I do the change of sta
> > portmap(8) and therefore mountd(8) should be started before
> > the nfs filesystems get mounted. But because portmap(8) is in
> > /usr/sbin , users with a nfs mounted /usr filesystem or with
> > diskless filesystems will have big problems.
I mean, that if I do the change of startup-order, di
>
> Hi,
>
> I think we should move portmap(8) to /sbin for the following reason:
>
> portmap(8) and therefore mountd(8) should be started before
> the nfs filesystems get mounted. But because portmap(8) is in
> /usr/sbin , users with a nfs mounted /usr filesystem or with
> diskless filesystems
20 matches
Mail list logo
