We manage 18,000 Unix/Linux machines via configuration files and packages stored in AFS. So far nothing else comes close to scaling as well as AFS. The configuration management system was developed in house. We edit in one place and the information is pulled (from AFS) by the client based on subscription-like "duties" on each afs client. Obviously, you have to run an afs client on every machine. We've been managing our environment this way for 15 years.
--patty Dirk Heinrichs wrote: > Am 20.12.2010 19:26, schrieb Booker Bense: > >> My 2 cents... Outside of a few very specialized apps, putting software >> in AFS is a losing proposition these days. Since local disk space is >> growing so fast, there really is little justification for not simply >> using the package management system >> of the OS and simply installing locally. > > That would again mean that the sw had to be installed over and over > again, on every single machine. That may be OK for 2 or 5 machines, but > for a larger number this becomes a tedious task. And what about diskless > clients? > >> AFS is a great place to store rpms, dpkgs, etc... But there is so >> much sysadmin overhead in deploying apps in AFS, that unless you have a >> very standardized client base it simply isn't worth it for >> 99.9% of applications. > > I don't get that point. If there was an AFS aware package manager out > there (which was my question), then that overhead would drop to (nearly) > zero. > > Bye... > > Dirk > _______________________________________________ > OpenAFS-info mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
