Re: autofs vs amd: Is there a preference?
%% Regarding Re: autofs vs amd: Is there a preference?;
ao> hi ya robert
>> > I'm looking at my automount situation and wondering. Is one going
>> > away? Which is the "way to go" for automounting, amd or autofs?
ao> autofs vs amd is like tinydns vs bind or exim vs sendmail ( its
ao> does it do the minimum you need or is it loaded w/ unused features
... that is unless you use them.
Like /net. Which almost every enterprise environment I've seen makes
heavy use of.
Etc.
I like amd much better, specifically _because_ it's a user-space
application. This allows me to control it (with amq), stop and start
it, etc. much more reliably than autofs, which can easily get wedged and
since it's in the kernel, what can you do?
Plus, if you want it, the new version (still in beta) uses the autofs
kernel support to get the same performance as autofs.
OTOH, my neighbor just enabled autofs on his RH 8 system today after
weeks of using amd with no problems, and he had hardly started doing
anything when the kernel oopsed in the autofs code.
Not a great intro to autofs... :-/. At least if amd goes down (which
I've never had it do) it doesn't take the rest of the system down and
it's easy to restart.
ao> use autofs ... simple answer
Disagree... with both statements.
YMMV.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul D. Smith <psmith@nortelnetworks.com> HASMAT--HA Software Mthds & Tools
"Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These are my opinions---Nortel Networks takes no responsibility for them.
Reply to: