[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: CVS Best Practice: cvs in conjunction with nfs?

From: Kenneth Wolcott
Subject: Re: CVS Best Practice: cvs in conjunction with nfs?
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 17:49:28 -0700

[Trying to learn to bottom-post]

On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 14:57, Arthur Barrett <address@hidden> wrote:

> I recall from long ago being advised not
> to nfs mount the cvs repository.

Yes that is the best advice.

Whilst Larry's suggestions are good, I would also like to point out that
if your repository becomes corrupt that:
A) you may not know of the corruption unless you are looking/testing for
B) there are no failsafe automated tools for testing the integrity of
CVS repositories
C) once a repository is corrupt, there is little chance to rescue the
data short of restoring a backup
D) no-one will sympathise with your predicament since the repository is
stored on a network share (NFS or SAMBA)

With the prevalence and low cost of iSCSI SAN alternatives I do not
think that there is any reason to use NFS/SAMBA/Network Shares for a CVS
repository today (if indeed there ever was).


Arthur Barrett

Thank you, Larry and Arthur.

  At this time we are in a Solaris 9 cluster (one group) with Veritas SAN and two Solaris 10 machines (not clustered) with local disk and access to network filer.

  We are considering using ext protocol with ssh (wrapped so that it operates exactly like local protocol) versus having the CVS repository (local to Solaris 9 cluster) NFS-mounted onto the Solaris 10 machines.

  I'm all for the former.  I'm still leery of the latter.

Ken Wolcott

reply via email to

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