|
doesn't coda require authentication from each uid trying to access the
shared directory structure? that could pose a problem to webservers with
hundreds or thousands of sites that utilize cgi scripts via suexec and
other things that run as varying uids as opposed to 1 uid (the webserver
itself). maybe i'm wrong on that, however. =)
comments?
-tcl.
On Mon, 27 Sep 1999, J Saunders wrote:
> Gabriel Neagoe wrote:
> >
> > hello
> > i think that using NFS is not fault tolerant (if the nfs server breaks you
> > have a biiiiiiig problem)
> > IMHO using CODA fs would be a better idea
>
> What if the information was being built from a database, and could be
> rebuilt from the database? The database would use RAID for fault
> tolerance. My idea was to avoid querying the database all the time and
> having to format the pages on-the-fly. This way, information is at most
> one minute out of date, but avoids overloading the SQL server and
> slowing up response times.
>
> Would CODA have a significant speed advantage if the NFS (or NetBlock
> Device) server and web servers are on a local 100BaseTX network, and the
> webservers are connected to the internet via a 2Mbit line?
>
> I can see that CODA would reduce local network traffic and would enable
> continued serving of pages if the server went down. However, as far as
> performance goes, does it have anything over Net Block Device?
>
> Cheers,
> Jason
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: lvs-users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For additional commands, e-mail: lvs-users-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lvs-users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: lvs-users-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
