[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Discouraging :local:

From: david
Subject: Re: Discouraging :local:
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 12:29:52 -0600 (CST)

> --On Thursday, January 23, 2003 12:43 PM -0500 Larry Jones
> <address@hidden> wrote:
> > What makes :local: inadvisable is the disk not being local, but rather
> > being on some kind of network filesystem.  I don't know of any way to
> > detect that.
> But *why* is that bad? After all, a SCSI disk is on the other end of a SCSI
> cable, and so is "networked" in some sense. Why is that ok but a "network"
> disk is not?
Because it empirically doesn't work reliably.  Every time I can remember
that somebody was complaining about repository corruption (or something
that wound up being repository corruption) it turned out that he or she
was using :local: with the repository NFS-mounted.

I admit that this is a very informal study, and do not claim to have
a perfect memory, but I've heard enough complaints that I would never
NFS-mount a repository and use :local:.  Repositories are usually
valuable, and screwing them up is normally a Bad Thing.  I don't know
how often it would happen, but once might well be too much.

If I hear similar complaints where the repository was SCSI-mounted
rather than NFS-mounted, I'll be happy to consider that.

AFAIK, nobody knows exactly why NFS can mess with a repository, and
it happens rarely enough that nobody's really caught it in the act.

Now building a CVS reference site at

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]