On Sun Jun 2 17:59:16 EDT 2013, 23h...@gmail.com wrote: > > dedicate a machine to the file server. > > This must be the best way to keep the plebeian hands off the artwork: > museums that are only open to curators. > This certainly also provided for my technical contribution to this mailing > list.
it's odd to interpert this as a restriction when i believe this is a common technique, even among people with single-user systems. the reason for this technique is that if one dedicates a machine (or vm) to the file server, than one can be sure that punting the cpu server will leave one's files available and bugs in the cpu server won't leak over. at home, this is very helpful as sometimes the man cpu/auth server gets confused. dns is a common reason. it's good to be able to reboot the cpu server without interrupting my terminal. running out of memory or procs also has no effect on the fs. it is tautology to say that i have access to the file server. a side benefit is this technique scales to very large systems. at work we run a file server(per location) that supports 40+ cpu/terminal machines and many users. in this case direct access to the file server is restricted to those reponsible for keeping it running. the seperate file server allows a policy that many folks can fix the dns server without becoming responsible for any file server issues. > >> > my guess is that it's a mutated gene. > > but was probably abused as a child. > > This is unhelpful. I wouldn't even go as far as calling Kurt a troll. > You are just hurling off boring insults whereas he was pointing out > the sad truth in a joking thus diplomatic manner - subsequently sorry, what point was he making? i saw a clearly false claim unsupported by evidence or anecdote that fossil is not stable. but that's not making a point. - erik
