On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 11:50:56AM -0500, R P Herrold wrote: > On 4 Nov 2002, Tom Lisjac wrote: > > > I've got a "how-to" almost ready to release on this subject. > > > > Unfortunately I'm the only one that's performed the configuration > > procedure I describe in the document... so I'd be very interested in > > hearing from anyone who might like to add a second server to an existing > > LTSP system. This would really help to verify that my build procedure > > works and is easy to follow. > > The change seems to consist of setting a second (and more) > 'next-server' in the dhcpd.conf (to spread tftp load) for > ranges of IP's or hosts, and in the gdm chooser, for allowing > an unskilled user to end up on the less loaded of multiple X > servers --
The tftp load is not an issue, the point of having two dhcp-servers is that they will split (see the split and hba options of dhcpd!) the terminals between them *on every stage* tftp, nfs and most importantly xdmcp (by default the terminals will run X -query and get a login prompt at the server they booted from). To have the "unskilled user" end up on the less loaded of the application servers (please don't use the term X servers when you mean application server) is probably not what most ltsp-admin would want since that would tend to give resource demanding users more resources than others (unless the demanding user(s) were logged in last), and that would not be *fair* (YMMV). dhcpd can spread the terminals at any ratio with the hba option, that seems the way to go IMHO. If you want more than two servers I think you must solve things at xdmcp level, since dhcpd can only co-operate in a pair. But the complexity will increase in other ways too, a) keeping the applications up to date on three servers will most likely be more work than on two, keeping /home in sync will be slightly more complicated also. Nothing that can't be solved, but more complex. > The dhcpd.conf man page example for next-server is not working > cleanly for me, and I am debugging this at the moment. use split instead. > A simple GDM chooser setup is documented at > http://www.owlriver.com/tips/gdm-setup/ > but it needs to be extended to offer just two or three of the > least loaded ... or simply dump the user onto one of the least > loaded without intervention > > NFS export of /home makes the server choice a matter of > indifference. True, but it introduces a single point of failure that can be avoided if /home is duplicated and keept synced. (Also rember to not export /home over the same subnet as the terminals are on since that introduces a security risk) -- Hans Ekbrand
msg09233/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
