On 11/23/2014 01:35 PM, Jeff Schroeder wrote:
On Saturday, November 22, 2014, Alan Evangelista
<ala...@linux.vnet.ibm.com <mailto: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.
cobbler sync is naive, it writes tftp files for all systems. In Cobbler
latest code, sync between Cobbler system object
and TFTP server is done incrementally via lite_sync when netboot is
enabled/disabled in a Cobbler system
object. This decreased much the performance difference between using an
external FTP server and Cobbler's own
FTP server. This is already available in Cobbler 2.6.
Regards,
Alan Evangelista
_______________________________________________
cobbler-devel mailing list
cobbler-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/cobbler-devel
