On Saturday, November 22, 2014, Alan Evangelista <ala...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> Question 1: From the user perspective, what is the benefit of using > Cobbler's own TFTP server, > implemented in Python, over using inet TFTP server or another TFTP server > ? I see it generates > templates in RAM instead of creating files (eg boot loader configuration > file), but I dont > know if this translates in a performance gain. Great question Alan. From my experience at $previous_job running cobbler sync when you have thousands of records takes a very long time. With the built in cobbler tftp server, there is no sync after flipping the NetBoot boolean. I actually see that feature as a massive edge over Ohad's Foreman for larger installations vs waiting 60 seconds for a sync to complete. > > Question 2: Cobbler TFTP server supports Linux automated installation? > Automated installation > related kernel options are built in tftpgen.py and Cobbler TFTP server > does not use it, > it just renders the boot loader configuration file with system blended > data. I'm not entirely sure, but we used the snot out of it for a one bootable infra where the is ran in memory and the disks were used for a dumb cache. It was pretty amazing. > > Question 3: is it worth it to keep Cobbler TFTP server? > That is a tough question. I genuinely see it as an advantage only cobbler has over "the competition", but it might need a bit more work to match functionality with tftpd. What do you think? -- Text by Jeff, typos by iPhone
_______________________________________________ cobbler-devel mailing list cobbler-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/cobbler-devel
