Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-programming (29 mails)
| < Previous | Next > |
Re: [opensuse-programming] Where to save "global" data files from application
- From: Randall R Schulz <rschulz@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 18:14:14 -0700
- Message-id: <200707271814.14188.rschulz@xxxxxxxxx>
On Friday 27 July 2007 17:41, Greg Freemyer wrote:
> ...
> >
> > You need to expand your imagination. The root directory on a
> > production system should probably never be touched at all. It's
> > best left to the base operating system itself.
>
> I'm talking about creating a mount point in the root directory and
> then mounting your big data partition there. I really don't see why
> admins would dislike /data or whatever as the mount point.
I understand that, but it's still a bad idea. The root directory and
partition belong exclusively to the operating system. It's ill-advised
to usurp that ownership.
> Last time I worked with a Oracle database, I'm sure thats what they
> were doing. (I did not do the install, so maybe the person who did
> overrode the defaults.)
I don't doubt that Oracle (or MySQL or PostgreSQL, etc.) are flexible
enough to do this, but that does not mean it's a good idea.
> Seriously, if you have a TB of data your mounting as a single
> partition from a SAN as a local drive, where are you saying to mount
> it.
Did you mean to use a question mark? Assuming so, I mean you should
mount it in some place dedicated to data expansion, not the root file
system, which belongs to the operating system, obviously! God, man...
Do you think this is for use on a personal computer? We're obviously
talking about application or data servers here.
> The idea of a mount point in /usr/local/data for instance just
> seems crazy to me, especially if /usr is itself a separate
> filesystem.
Your insanity is your own, thankfully.
> Another example is your building your box exclusively to be a samba
> fileserver. Once again, I think the typical thing to do would be
> create a big raid 5 (or 10) based volume, mount it at the root level
> and then share if via samba.
Being a file server and being and application host are not really the
same thing, are they? No, they're not. Regardless, the root directory
is not a playground for application or file service deployment. In
fact, the latter makes an even weaker case, since shares are seen by
clients independent of their location in the serving host's file system
and there is no justification at all for using the root to mount local
file system volumes.
> Strange. Your disturbed I would mount big dedicated data partitions
> at the root level, and I'm disturbed its not standard practice. :(
Presumably you meant "You're." Please proofread your posts.
As to your apparent sadness over not having to organize your
deployments, that's something you'll have to deal with on your own.
> Greg
RRS
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-programming+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-programming+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> ...
> >
> > You need to expand your imagination. The root directory on a
> > production system should probably never be touched at all. It's
> > best left to the base operating system itself.
>
> I'm talking about creating a mount point in the root directory and
> then mounting your big data partition there. I really don't see why
> admins would dislike /data or whatever as the mount point.
I understand that, but it's still a bad idea. The root directory and
partition belong exclusively to the operating system. It's ill-advised
to usurp that ownership.
> Last time I worked with a Oracle database, I'm sure thats what they
> were doing. (I did not do the install, so maybe the person who did
> overrode the defaults.)
I don't doubt that Oracle (or MySQL or PostgreSQL, etc.) are flexible
enough to do this, but that does not mean it's a good idea.
> Seriously, if you have a TB of data your mounting as a single
> partition from a SAN as a local drive, where are you saying to mount
> it.
Did you mean to use a question mark? Assuming so, I mean you should
mount it in some place dedicated to data expansion, not the root file
system, which belongs to the operating system, obviously! God, man...
Do you think this is for use on a personal computer? We're obviously
talking about application or data servers here.
> The idea of a mount point in /usr/local/data for instance just
> seems crazy to me, especially if /usr is itself a separate
> filesystem.
Your insanity is your own, thankfully.
> Another example is your building your box exclusively to be a samba
> fileserver. Once again, I think the typical thing to do would be
> create a big raid 5 (or 10) based volume, mount it at the root level
> and then share if via samba.
Being a file server and being and application host are not really the
same thing, are they? No, they're not. Regardless, the root directory
is not a playground for application or file service deployment. In
fact, the latter makes an even weaker case, since shares are seen by
clients independent of their location in the serving host's file system
and there is no justification at all for using the root to mount local
file system volumes.
> Strange. Your disturbed I would mount big dedicated data partitions
> at the root level, and I'm disturbed its not standard practice. :(
Presumably you meant "You're." Please proofread your posts.
As to your apparent sadness over not having to organize your
deployments, that's something you'll have to deal with on your own.
> Greg
RRS
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-programming+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-programming+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx
| < Previous | Next > |