[rhelv6-beta-list] Does the NFS install with ISO images still work?

[Justin Clift]

On 06/08/2010 09:42 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
<snip>
> I also recommend very strongly against the NFS installation approach.

Removing options that offer alternative functionality, and that have 
already been working (for years) isn't that good.

Some people like NFS, and for many situations it's very easy to 
configure and have running.

NFS also has a *large* amount of development work going into it's 
version 4.1 revision, allowing things like parallel NFS (multiple, + 
redundant host servers), many optimisations, and security improvements.

Some of this functionality can be done through HTTP.  And HTTP is an 
easy solution for people to set up if they're familiar with it.

But, RHEL is an enterprise distribution.  Enterprise *nix staff are not 
all familiar with HTTP, but many of them are familiar with NFS due to 
it's long history.

As you've also pointed out, enterprises commonly deploy NAS solutions 
like NetApp for shared storage.  NetApp filers serve over NFS (by 
default), CIFS (with appropriate licensing), iSCSI (with appropriate 
licensing), and only recently (again with licensing) over HTTP.

These NetApp filers are expensive and *optimised* for NFS (with higher 
performance than most chunky *nix boxes :/ ).  Use of NFS in these 
enterprises is increasing if anything because it works well. ;)

Anyway, while I don't think your preference for HTTP is wrong, I do 
think trying to remove someone else's preference is.

Regards and best wishes,

Justin Clift

-- 
Salasaga  -  Open Source eLearning IDE
               http://www.salasaga.org