Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.
On Sat, Oct 14, 2006 at 12:09:15PM -0600, Dan Brown wrote: > On Saturday, October 14, 2006 Mustafa A. Hashmi wrote: > > On 10/10/06, Dan Brown <danb at zu.com> wrote: ... > > > One thing I keep seeing in various > > > documents however is a warning not to have the server mount its own > > > NFS shares. There is never reason (even a vague reason) given why not > > > to however. I can see the obvious reasons (eg. infinitely nested > > > filesystems via symlinks/mounts, crossmounts, etc), but my directory structures should > > > not need anything like this at all. Other than overall system complexity, > > > I don't see any reasons to not be able to self mount NFS with a whole > > > lot of trouble. > > > > Odd -- the NFS-HA howto shows how to do exactly this. Also: > > we've deployed this for mail and web without issues this far, > > albeit, in a non-complex environment. > > You mean the one at http://linux-ha.org/HaNFS ? It examples a setup with to > HA NFS servers, and two clients (although not specifiying whether they are > one in the same) . This, along with a fair number of other articles I've > read on using DRBD and NFS all have something like this (from the > linux-ha.org page): > > "NFS-mounting any filesystem on your NFS servers is highly discouraged." > > But none of them ever really give a good explanation(if at all) why. > Having not done much with NFS before, and certainly not in a production > environment, I don't have the experience with NFS to understand many reasons > behind this sort of statement. The biggest problem was with the fuser command hanging. I have updated that web page to link to the mailing list threads where the problems were detailed. - Dave