I chose to try sharing /usr when we were ready to go from 1 test & 1 prod guest to 2 test & 3 prod guests. I added a minidisk to my maintenance server, copied /usr and then built a much smaller / (root) minidisk for our test server with the appropriate addition to /etc/fstab and it worked. Cloning the new test and production guests went easy. The next maintenance cycle (much closer to together back then) was a learning curve but I got the original production server switched to using the read-only /usr too. Unless someone really wants to pay for a fully writable guest, this is how I create ALL new servers.
/Tom Kern --- James Melin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > My boss is asking me what parts of a Linux file system can be shared. > My somewhat generic answer was 'The parts that can be guaranteed to > only > ever be read only'. > > He countered that he read it could be done. I said that if we > designing > for that from the word go, it would be significantly easier to do > than to > retrofit it into a dozen guests. > > So the question is, whom on the list has had experience with trying > to > share as much of the file system as is possible, and what did you > choose to > share? Was it worth the hassle of backfitting it or did you go > forward with > that design in mind. If you retrofitted it, what did you learn, and > what > should we avoid should we choose to do this? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
