Or Samba, too. I suggested sshfs because the OP said "over SSH".
Also, it takes *no* set-up on the server--just have ssh running. Not
that NFS is hard to set up, of course--just requires some actual
work. And who wants to do that?
On Jan 30, 11:29 am, Alex Robbins
wrote:
> It might be even ea
It might be even easier to just set up an NFS mount of the other
machines. It would be a lot like Jeff's idea, but NFS is pretty tried
and true. (I don't know anything about SSHFS, it might be really good
too.)
On Jan 30, 9:54 am, Jeff FW wrote:
> Instead of trying to get Django to do something
Instead of trying to get Django to do something like that, have you
looked into using sshfs? That would make it essentially transparent--
all Django would know is that it's saving a file to a filesystem.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SSHFS
On Jan 29, 9:05 am, Andrew Ingram wrote:
> On Jan 29, 1
On Jan 29, 1:19 pm, Christian Joergensen wrote:
> What if one of the machines was unresponsive at the time of the upload?
One option would be to have all the files uploaded locally, but the
handler would additionally copy to the other locations. The other
would just to be to have some exception
Andrew Ingram wrote:
[...]
> Ideally you'd be able to provide it with a tuple of machines to
> connect to which would allow you to upload to all the machines at once
> (but even if there's one that only allows you to upload to one machine
> that would still be useful).
What if one of the machin
Hi All,
At the moment our Django apps run on the same server that the static
images are served from, we are looking to change this to improve
redundancy.
Has anyone created (or attempted to create) a new file backend that
uses SSH?
Ideally you'd be able to provide it with a tuple of machines to
6 matches
Mail list logo