Fwd: Re: [Leaplist] discussion - ways to share/access data

[Dan Cherry]

On Wednesday 05 November 2008 5:52:10 pm Bruce Metcalf wrote:
> Dan Cherry wrote:
> > I use multiple computers, and would be interested in various ideas
> > and viewpoints on storing files (if you use multiple computers to
> > share files).
> >
> > So, for those of you who use multiple pc's, what have you found that
> > works best for accessing your document files?
>
> I took an older system and made it a dedicated NFS file server. The
> trick for me was to mount the servers files to a specific directory on
> each of the client systems (in my case, /home/hq). This leaves the
> configuration files on the individual machines (/home/username still
> exists), but permits common access to the shared file area while
> protecting work in progress.
>
I'm leaning in this direction for use within my home network.  Then keeping an 
rsync folder of the shared wip on my laptop.  If I'm away, automount doesn't 
finde the nfs share, and I can run a quick script to mount the mirrored area 
to the wip folder in home/user.  Then worry about resyncing when I return to 
my intranet.

> I am now in the process of migrating local home directories to the
> server. For example, moving the contents of /home/bruce on each machine
> into /home/hq/bruce on the file server. I'm only moving visible files
> (those not starting with .) which -- if I understand correctly -- will
> leave the config files behind.

Mostly true - quite a few of the kde apps keep their data 
in .kde/share/apps/...  but since I try to share most of this from 
centralized places such as IMAP or with symbolic links to common areas, it's 
less of an issue.  It would be really nice if KDE saw fit to COMPLETELY 
separate configs and data to separate folders within .kde - and to some 
extent, they do, but they've got a ways to go.
>
> This approach does require some additional thought on the part of the
> network users, some of whom don't quite "get it" -- and since one's my
> wife, I may have to move to a different approach. We'll see.
>
> When I de-haunt one more machine, I plan to migrate my file server to a
> pair of systems configured as a single high-availability server. Again,
> I see no noticeable delays from using a 500MHz machine for a file
> server, so getting two boxen to do this with should be a trivial exercise.
>
thanks for the reply.
> HTH,
> Bruce



-------------------------------------------------------

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.