[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: (OT) The NFS security system

On Fri, Sep 13, 2002 at 10:18:21AM -0700, Craig Dickson wrote:
> David Roundy wrote:
> > I second the recommendation of sfs, which is quite nice and pretty easy to
> > set up.  Like nfs, it doesn't require any funky partitioning of your
> > drive.
> As opposed to what? Does Coda require weird partitioning?

That was what I remembered.  I just took a look, and see that you don't
need to have a separate partition on the server for the RVM metadata, but
they warn that it could be slow if you don't use a separate partition
(around 40M / gigabyte served).  Also the RVM transaction log is
recommended to be a raw partition but could be a file.  I'm not sure why
they recommend it as a partition, but when the recommended method (in the
HOWTO) seems to involve two dedicated partitions, it seems like a bit much.
David Roundy

Reply to: