Ivan's XO Field Upgrade Proposal
Mike C. Fletcher
mcfletch at vrplumber.com
Tue Jun 26 13:35:44 EDT 2007
Dan Williams wrote:
...
> I'm not arguing simplicity; just that we have to be aware of the
> implications of having lots of XOs pulling from the server with some
> overlap with this method, but we don't with XO->XO. We just have to
> make the tradeoffs clear, and understand them.
>
Agreed. Given the simplicity of setting it up, the approach should be
given consideration. I would judge that having this robust and simple
from the start (when we'll be having lots of updates and a far greater
chance for failures to happen) to be more important than bandwidth
pre-optimisation.
At a later point, if we can be sure that the "core system software"
image is always distinct from the "sensitive data" and "user data"
overlays, we can readily provide a service at some point that allows the
laptops themselves to advertise an rsync-based source running in a
special chroot with just those (read-only) layers. The overlay manager
could initiate an rsync service on the laptop in response to a tubes
request (or whatever) in order to allow for XO-to-XO sharing at some point.
Have fun,
Mike
--
________________________________________________
Mike C. Fletcher
Designer, VR Plumber, Coder
http://www.vrplumber.com
http://blog.vrplumber.com
More information about the Devel
mailing list