hi ya jonathan...
use an automoutner cause...
- it automatically mounts the directories/parititions you need
- it automatically unmounts it when you no longer need it
- minimize corrupting it/erasing it accidentally
due to wierd/whacy errors likepower failures, hw resets
use autofs if you have simple mountings
/home
/var/spool/mail
use amd( ? ) if you need more interaction with sun, sgi, hp, etc..etc..
- if you need multi-mounts, multi-homed mounts, sub-mounts, and
failovers
you can explicitly manually mount.... if you only need it once in a while
mount /dev/fd0 /mnt/floppy
when automounting stuff.... or in /etc/fstab and any automount config
files
- use soft mounts...to prevent your system from hanging while
the other machine on the other side of the lan is rebooting
- use intr option so that you can controlC out of any hung process
- use hard mount for things like /home where you have to wait
for the home server to be up and running before you can do
anything
penalty for using automounters...
- you have to wait a few seconds for the resource to be maounted
if its not yet available
horror stories...
- dont use "hard" mounts unless you have to...
( if you dont know why you need hard mounts....use soft mounts intead)
- ( personal preferences )
To test the effects of the otehr machine on your own workstation....
ls -la the /other-server/home/foo/test.c
( assuming it is automounted or hard mounted or manually mounted )
pull the nic wire from the other-server
- now site back and wait...till you get pissed....
have fun
alvin
http://www.linux-consulting.com/AutoFS/autofs-HOWTO.html
On Mon, 26 Feb 2001, Jonathan Matthews wrote:
> Thanks to those who responded so . . succinctly <g> to my post about
> needing to do on-demand NFS mounting.
>
> Just a quickie for the list, now: which should I use?
> What are the implications of using one over the other?
> Is either noticably faster, more robust, or simply better than the
> other?
>
> Equally, has anyone got any horror stories about either . . ?
