On 03/31/16 12:51, Lloyd Brown wrote:
> 
> 
> On 03/31/2016 10:35 AM, Josh Fisher wrote:
>> I see your point. Why NFS, then? Rather than hundreds of automount 
>> mountpoints, a single iSCSI target could expose the user home 
>> directories with a single mountpoint, assuming the NAS device supports 
>> iSCSI.
> 
> Several reasons.  The problems I've been describing here are only issues
> for backups, but the actual filesystems are going to be used by >900
> hosts.  I suspect that any kind of block-based export like iSCSI, isn't
> going to be viable.  I've seen shared-block filesystems that work for
> 8-10 hosts at a time, but that's about it.  I could be out-of-date on
> this, but that's my last understanding.  But we're already doing NFS to
> those same hosts, right now, with our old storage system, and it works
> just fine.


No, Lloyd, I think you're misunderstanding Josh's suggestion.

Let the user NFS hosts continue to automount their user home directories
over NFS, just as you are now.  Don't change anything there.  It's not
broke, don't "fix" it.

But if the NAS supports iSCSI-target mode, export the entire shared
volume from the NAS as a single iSCSI target to the backup server, and
back up the NAS all at once over iSCSI without having to worry about
mounting and unmounting individual homedir shares or all of the
headaches that come with trying to back up over NFS.


-- 
  Phil Stracchino
  Babylon Communications
  phils AT caerllewys DOT net
  phil AT co.ordinate DOT org
  Landline: 603.293.8485

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transform Data into Opportunity.
Accelerate data analysis in your applications with
Intel Data Analytics Acceleration Library.
Click to learn more.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=278785471&iu=/4140
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users