Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!spool.mu.edu!agate!ziploc!eps
From: eps@toaster.SFSU.EDU (Eric P. Scott)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: NeXT lab advice
Message-ID: <1698@toaster.SFSU.EDU>
Date: 11 Jun 91 02:56:19 GMT
References: <9106061532.AA21620@cheops.cis.ohio-state.edu> <91161.143520SLVQC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Reply-To: eps@cs.SFSU.EDU (Eric P. Scott)
Organization: San Francisco State University
Lines: 61

In article <91161.143520SLVQC@CUNYVM.BITNET> SLVQC@CUNYVM.BITNET
	(Salvatore Saieva) writes:
>I'm curious how you Lab Managers are using the 105MB HD on the client
>machines. Do you netboot the clients mounting / from the server or do
>you keep boot files (and other pre-installed files) on the local client

Absolutely not.  We COMPLETELY wiped the 105s and named them all
swapdisk.  So far they've been adequate, but I think we've been
extremely lucky.  Once Mathematica 2.0 turns up, no doubt someone
will burn up every last bit of the local swap and start hammering
on the server.  :-(

>Netbooting and mounting / remotely doesn't make use good use of an
>available 105MB HD and it's slow to startup NeXT apps

I disagree.  Unless you're trying to get away with 8MB machines,
in which case you deserve to lose.  Our "showcase" cluster has a
32MB NeXTstation with a 400MB ST1480 serving 20MB NeXTstations.
Launch time is comparable to or better than using the local 105MB
drives--those Quantums are total dogs.  "We only bought them
because we knew we wouldn't have to use them."

>                                                       Booting the
>NeXTstations from the local HD is faster,

Not in our experience.  And there's no root fsck needed after a
client crash, either.

>                                          provides quicker startup for
>the available pre-installed NeXT software,

Nope.

>                                               it looks like a nuisance
>to setup a NeXTstation to run the dev tool available on the server.

And just think about how much fun you'll have upgrading when the
next Software Release comes out.  Life's much easier with
"dataless" workstations (one of the better ideas from MIT's
Project Athena, IMHO).

>I've been thinking about some sort of compromise: Netbooting the
>NeXTstations and mounting / remotely, using the local 105 HD for
>/private files,

/private/etc on each workstation?  Won't that be an absolute joy
to administrate?  Where's my eleven-foot pole?  On my server, I
have a lot of /clients/*/etc/whatevers hard-linked--this
guarantees consistency.

>                                                       Does this
>sound too nutty? Am I missing something, or maybe just trying to
>complicate the issue?

Something smells with your setup.  Do you have an unusually
busy network (e.g. large and bridged rather than routed) or
are your machines dying for lack of RAM?  If the machines are
OK, I'd beg/borrow/steal a protocol analyzer and a TDR and
start hunting for network gremlins.

					-=EPS=-