[KLUG Members] An NFS design/use question...

[Adam Williams]

> To NFS admins....
> Please rate my progress in the NFS food chain, based on this idea, and
> maybe provide some lucid comments to indicate why you have scored me the
> way you did.
> Consider:
> mount nfs-one:/Users /home
> mount nfs-two:/shared/mail/joe /home/joe/mail
> The ratings (please check one):
> [ ] [1] Oh, forget it...Go sell shoes! 
> [ ] [2] Bob, you really don't get it, do you? This is just awful!
> [X] [3] Bob, you show signs of promise in the NFS world. Nice idea!

I'll give you a 3!  What you propose is certainly doable, and should
work fine.  The only gotcha may be that /home/joe/mail is mounted on an
NFS mount from a different server (/home).  So if nfs-one dies you'll
probably loose the functionality of both mounts just because of the way
most tools work in regard to opening files (walking the path for
permissions, etc...).

For a SOHO LAN I think it is perfectly acceptable.

For a larger LAN I think you need to just loose the dependency on the
filesystem for mail (/home/{user}/mail) and move to an IMAP oriented
solution like Cyrus.  Large systems with mail-in-filesystem are bad
enough; add NFS and it all goes down the crapper.

Only other suggestion might be to not mount /home but to use an
automounter to connect to subordinate directories as required.

> [ ] [4] You have real talent and insight. Postpone looking for a
>         different day job.
> [ ] [5] Brilliant! You are managing to untie the Gordian knot, and you're
>         really thinking right about modularizing information over the LAN.
> [ ] [-] Other, (fill in here): __________________________________________