[selected responses interleaved] Agblad Tore wrote: > Here comes some feedback.
Awesome. Thanks! This is exciting stuff. By the way, you people at Volvo make good cars. > The bind mount is a source of failure, or not ? > What happens if it does not work for some reason ? > I guess the original mountpoint takes effect, ... Yes, if the bind mount fails, then what you get is the content which would have been hidden had it worked. (Usually an empty directory, but in the case of /etc you get whatever is in /etc on the read-only disk.) But like Mike said, failure of a bind mount is really rare unless there were some other failure ahead of it. > My prime concern here was /etc, > I wanted that one on a separate minidisk to be safe. Sure. You can have /etc on its own minidisk. To me, it means yet more disks and we have quite enough already. The reason for binding it from /local/etc is that /local now can contain "everything local to this system". You could then decide to bind /var from /local/var ... OR NOT. It's your option. (And I usually don't, but put /var on it's own disk like shown in table 1-1.) > I saw last in the pdf you have one guy,Carlos Ordonez, > always asking: isn't there a simpler way to do this ? Oh, yes ... I agree! In fact, in my presentations at SHARE, I fear I have detracted from the paper a bit. The paper has to serve an audience which cannot interact and ask questions, so it includes copious detail to bring everyone up to the same point, whether you "get it" about sharing disks or not. My primary server at home is a virtual machine with R/O root. It only has three system disks (plus three large LVs presented by the hypervisor for holding user content): boot, root, and /local. In that case, I left /opt and /usr as part of the shareable root and I bound /var and /srv from /local. But let me justify the paper's complexity a little. Most of us start simple and then add complexities over time. It is common practice to split /usr into its own partition even in PC land. The advantage of the split we have in this paper is that you MAY wish to share /usr and /opt with guests having a R/W root. Service is always the challenge. The more content residing in private storage, the more which will fall out when service is applied. The service process cannot account for where we might have moved /etc, so it simply does not know what to do about /etc updates which would need to get pushed out to all "client" systems. When the root is writable and not shared, this gets worse. > Every server configures the network/ip itself at every boot, ... Kind of like setting boot.findself to run every time. Sure, no problem. Or as Dave Boyes mentioned, the operational equivalent of DHCP. -- R; ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
