FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 07-17-2008, 03:32 PM
Nigel Wade
 
Default autofs

Mad Unix wrote:

I have setup NFS server RHEL5 , to serve some NFS clients RHEL5, at the
moment i setup the the nfs mount on the client manually
how can I convert it to autofs, i.e if nfs folder been requested it should
mount auto , till it finish the job?




There's a Fine Manual for you to Read here:
https://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/enterprise/RHEL-4-Manual/en-US/System_Administration_Guide_/

Section 21.2.2. Mounting NFS File Systems using autofs

--
Nigel Wade, System Administrator, Space Plasma Physics Group,
University of Leicester, Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK
E-mail : nmw@ion.le.ac.uk
Phone : +44 (0)116 2523548, Fax : +44 (0)116 2523555

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
 
Old 06-03-2011, 10:44 AM
Stéphane Guedon
 
Default autofs

anyone use autofs to manage mounting of nfs on a laptop ? Is it fluent, easy to
use ?
How many shares maximum ?

thanks
--
Stéphane Guedon
page web : http://www.22decembre.eu/
carte de visite : http://www.22decembre.eu/downloads/Stephane-Guedon.vcf
clé publique gpg : http://www.22decembre.eu/downloads/Stephane-Guedon.asc
 
Old 06-03-2011, 10:55 AM
Alan McKinnon
 
Default autofs

Apparently, though unproven, at 12:44 on Friday 03 June 2011, Stéphane Guedon
did opine thusly:

> anyone use autofs to manage mounting of nfs on a laptop ?

Is this mounting a share from an nfs server onto a laptop?

> Is it fluent,
> easy to use ?

It's NFS. The words "nfs" and "fluent, easy to use" do not belong in the same
sentence unless there's a "not" in the middle.

The point is that NFS was not designed with laptops and other devices that can
be disconnected in mind. It was designed for secure LANs that do not change
much, and laptops present issues that are not easy to solve.


> How many shares maximum ?

From a server? Hundreds, with ease. NFS is not the bottleneck, your shares are
limited by how much bandwidth you have over the network.
--
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
 
Old 06-03-2011, 11:37 AM
Stéphane Guedon
 
Default autofs

On Friday 03 June 2011 12:55:58 Alan McKinnon wrote:
> Apparently, though unproven, at 12:44 on Friday 03 June 2011, Stéphane
> Guedon
>
> did opine thusly:
> > anyone use autofs to manage mounting of nfs on a laptop ?
>
> Is this mounting a share from an nfs server onto a laptop?
>
> > Is it fluent,
> > easy to use ?
>
> It's NFS. The words "nfs" and "fluent, easy to use" do not belong in the
> same sentence unless there's a "not" in the middle.
>
> The point is that NFS was not designed with laptops and other devices that
> can be disconnected in mind. It was designed for secure LANs that do not
> change much, and laptops present issues that are not easy to solve.
>
> > How many shares maximum ?
>
> From a server? Hundreds, with ease. NFS is not the bottleneck, your shares
> are limited by how much bandwidth you have over the network.

Ok, it's a beginning.. :-) thank you !

Nfs hasn't been designed for laptop, it's ok. But, appart from coda (which has
a file size limit of 1 giga, so, useless in home networking), I know nothing
that is fit for network file-sharing for laptop (the laptop isn't the server of
course).

I search a solution for that since years !

--
Stéphane Guedon
page web : http://www.22decembre.eu/
carte de visite : http://www.22decembre.eu/downloads/Stephane-Guedon.vcf
clé publique gpg : http://www.22decembre.eu/downloads/Stephane-Guedon.asc
 
Old 06-03-2011, 12:18 PM
pk
 
Default autofs

On 2011-06-03 12:44, Stéphane Guedon wrote:
> anyone use autofs to manage mounting of nfs on a laptop ? Is it fluent, easy to

I'm not using any auto-mounters currently but this link may help(?):
http://www.linux-tutorial.info/modules.php?name=MContent&pageid=153

HTH

Best regards

Peter K
 
Old 06-03-2011, 12:18 PM
Volker Armin Hemmann
 
Default autofs

On Friday 03 June 2011 13:37:54 Stéphane Guedon wrote:
> On Friday 03 June 2011 12:55:58 Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > Apparently, though unproven, at 12:44 on Friday 03 June 2011, Stéphane
> > Guedon
> >
> > did opine thusly:
> > > anyone use autofs to manage mounting of nfs on a laptop ?
> >
> > Is this mounting a share from an nfs server onto a laptop?
> >
> > > Is it fluent,
> > > easy to use ?
> >
> > It's NFS. The words "nfs" and "fluent, easy to use" do not belong in the
> > same sentence unless there's a "not" in the middle.
> >
> > The point is that NFS was not designed with laptops and other devices
> > that can be disconnected in mind. It was designed for secure LANs that
> > do not change much, and laptops present issues that are not easy to
> > solve.
> >
> > > How many shares maximum ?
> >
> > From a server? Hundreds, with ease. NFS is not the bottleneck, your
> > shares are limited by how much bandwidth you have over the network.
>
> Ok, it's a beginning.. :-) thank you !
>
> Nfs hasn't been designed for laptop, it's ok. But, appart from coda (which
> has a file size limit of 1 giga, so, useless in home networking), I know
> nothing that is fit for network file-sharing for laptop (the laptop isn't
> the server of course).
>
> I search a solution for that since years !

samba?
 
Old 06-03-2011, 12:25 PM
Alan McKinnon
 
Default autofs

Apparently, though unproven, at 14:18 on Friday 03 June 2011, Volker Armin
Hemmann did opine thusly:

> On Friday 03 June 2011 13:37:54 Stéphane Guedon wrote:
> > On Friday 03 June 2011 12:55:58 Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > > Apparently, though unproven, at 12:44 on Friday 03 June 2011, Stéphane
> > > Guedon
> > >
> > > did opine thusly:
> > > > anyone use autofs to manage mounting of nfs on a laptop ?
> > >
> > > Is this mounting a share from an nfs server onto a laptop?
> > >
> > > > Is it fluent,
> > > > easy to use ?
> > >
> > > It's NFS. The words "nfs" and "fluent, easy to use" do not belong in
> > > the same sentence unless there's a "not" in the middle.
> > >
> > > The point is that NFS was not designed with laptops and other devices
> > > that can be disconnected in mind. It was designed for secure LANs that
> > > do not change much, and laptops present issues that are not easy to
> > > solve.
> > >
> > > > How many shares maximum ?
> > >
> > > From a server? Hundreds, with ease. NFS is not the bottleneck, your
> > > shares are limited by how much bandwidth you have over the network.
> >
> > Ok, it's a beginning.. :-) thank you !
> >
> > Nfs hasn't been designed for laptop, it's ok. But, appart from coda
> > (which has a file size limit of 1 giga, so, useless in home networking),
> > I know nothing that is fit for network file-sharing for laptop (the
> > laptop isn't the server of course).
> >
> > I search a solution for that since years !
>
> samba?

+1

Samba works nicely for ad-hoc connections, the kind of thing Windows clients
would do. And it's a lot more tolerant of connections going away than NFS.


--
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
 
Old 06-03-2011, 12:57 PM
Florian Philipp
 
Default autofs

Am 03.06.2011 14:25, schrieb Alan McKinnon:
> Apparently, though unproven, at 14:18 on Friday 03 June 2011, Volker Armin
> Hemmann did opine thusly:
>
>> On Friday 03 June 2011 13:37:54 Stéphane Guedon wrote:
>>> On Friday 03 June 2011 12:55:58 Alan McKinnon wrote:
>>>> Apparently, though unproven, at 12:44 on Friday 03 June 2011, Stéphane
>>>> Guedon
>>>>
>>>> did opine thusly:
[...]
>>>>
>>>> The point is that NFS was not designed with laptops and other devices
>>>> that can be disconnected in mind. It was designed for secure LANs that
>>>> do not change much, and laptops present issues that are not easy to
>>>> solve.
[...]
>>>
>>> Nfs hasn't been designed for laptop, it's ok. But, appart from coda
>>> (which has a file size limit of 1 giga, so, useless in home networking),
>>> I know nothing that is fit for network file-sharing for laptop (the
>>> laptop isn't the server of course).
>>>
>>> I search a solution for that since years !
>>
>> samba?
>
> +1
>
> Samba works nicely for ad-hoc connections, the kind of thing Windows clients
> would do. And it's a lot more tolerant of connections going away than NFS.
>
>

I always was under the impression that NFS is more fault-tolerant on the
network because of its usage of stateless UDP connections whereas CIFS
usually freezes when the connection is lost. In the end, both issue an
IO error, usually crashing an unprepared application. So, in which
regard performs CIFS better with interrupted connections?

That being said, I always use NFS over TCP because of performance issues
with UDP and wireless LAN.

Regards,
Florian Philipp
 
Old 06-03-2011, 03:06 PM
Alan McKinnon
 
Default autofs

Apparently, though unproven, at 14:57 on Friday 03 June 2011, Florian Philipp
did opine thusly:

> Am 03.06.2011 14:25, schrieb Alan McKinnon:
> > Apparently, though unproven, at 14:18 on Friday 03 June 2011, Volker
> > Armin
> >
> > Hemmann did opine thusly:
> >> On Friday 03 June 2011 13:37:54 Stéphane Guedon wrote:
> >>> On Friday 03 June 2011 12:55:58 Alan McKinnon wrote:
> >>>> Apparently, though unproven, at 12:44 on Friday 03 June 2011, Stéphane
> >>>> Guedon
>
> >>>> did opine thusly:
> [...]
>
> >>>> The point is that NFS was not designed with laptops and other devices
> >>>> that can be disconnected in mind. It was designed for secure LANs that
> >>>> do not change much, and laptops present issues that are not easy to
> >>>> solve.
>
> [...]
>
> >>> Nfs hasn't been designed for laptop, it's ok. But, appart from coda
> >>> (which has a file size limit of 1 giga, so, useless in home
> >>> networking), I know nothing that is fit for network file-sharing for
> >>> laptop (the laptop isn't the server of course).
> >>>
> >>> I search a solution for that since years !
> >>
> >> samba?
> >
> > +1
> >
> > Samba works nicely for ad-hoc connections, the kind of thing Windows
> > clients would do. And it's a lot more tolerant of connections going away
> > than NFS.
>
> I always was under the impression that NFS is more fault-tolerant on the
> network because of its usage of stateless UDP connections whereas CIFS
> usually freezes when the connection is lost. In the end, both issue an
> IO error, usually crashing an unprepared application. So, in which
> regard performs CIFS better with interrupted connections?

I find that when an NFS server disappears from the client's view, the only
thing that brings it back is making the server visible again. True, there are
options that modify this behaviour (hard, soft) but they come with their own
risks as described in the man page.

Trying to unmount an NFS mount with no server is painful, and all too easy to
do if you carry your laptop to a meeting room in another building.

CIFS can usually at least be killed (depending on how it's mounted) - a
kioslave in konqueror for example is easy to kill.

Neither option is well suited for laptops IMO but on balance CIFS tends to be
easier for the user to deal with.

> That being said, I always use NFS over TCP because of performance issues
> with UDP and wireless LAN.

Smart move. I genuinely feel that the use-case for NFS over UDP has largely
gone away in these modern times and TCP is the better choice for normal use.

OT, but the same applies to auth systems i.e. tacacs vs radius

--
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
 
Old 06-04-2011, 12:40 AM
William Kenworthy
 
Default autofs

On Fri, 2011-06-03 at 14:57 +0200, Florian Philipp wrote:
> Am 03.06.2011 14:25, schrieb Alan McKinnon:
> > Apparently, though unproven, at 14:18 on Friday 03 June 2011, Volker Armin
> > Hemmann did opine thusly:
> >
> >> On Friday 03 June 2011 13:37:54 Stéphane Guedon wrote:
> >>> On Friday 03 June 2011 12:55:58 Alan McKinnon wrote:
> >>>> Apparently, though unproven, at 12:44 on Friday 03 June 2011, Stéphane
> >>>> Guedon
> >>>>
> >>>> did opine thusly:
> [...]
> >>>>
> >>>> The point is that NFS was not designed with laptops and other devices
> >>>> that can be disconnected in mind. It was designed for secure LANs that
> >>>> do not change much, and laptops present issues that are not easy to
> >>>> solve.
> [...]
> >>>
> >>> Nfs hasn't been designed for laptop, it's ok. But, appart from coda
> >>> (which has a file size limit of 1 giga, so, useless in home networking),
> >>> I know nothing that is fit for network file-sharing for laptop (the
> >>> laptop isn't the server of course).
> >>>
> >>> I search a solution for that since years !
> >>
> >> samba?
> >
> > +1
> >
> > Samba works nicely for ad-hoc connections, the kind of thing Windows clients
> > would do. And it's a lot more tolerant of connections going away than NFS.
> >
> >
>
> I always was under the impression that NFS is more fault-tolerant on the
> network because of its usage of stateless UDP connections whereas CIFS
> usually freezes when the connection is lost. In the end, both issue an
> IO error, usually crashing an unprepared application. So, in which
> regard performs CIFS better with interrupted connections?
>
> That being said, I always use NFS over TCP because of performance issues
> with UDP and wireless LAN.
>
> Regards,
> Florian Philipp
>

No, its ok in a fixed network but you get wierd issues like clients
hanging on shutdown because the NFS server goes away first, and its an
administrative pita when it stops working - could be firewall, something
missed in a new kernel etc.

Ive been using it for mythtv and diskless systems (NFS over TCP) for
quite awhile and its a fight every few months to find out why host x
syuddenly doesnt want to play. But otherwise works well use wise in a
controlled environment.

Laptops are a whole different matter though - you might be better off
side stepping if its only looking at media by looking into streaming
rather than storage mapping. Otherwise, Samba is probably the next
best.

BillK


--
William Kenworthy <billk@iinet.net.au>
Home in Perth!
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 09:44 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org