How do I add an avatar to the public avatar library?
Re: Best Practise to implenet NIS if we have all solaris,linux,aix
Hello Guest
  
  • Login
• Register…
• Start blog
  • Who, Where, When
• What can I do?
• What to Read?
  • Polls
• Avatars
• Interests
  • Cities and Countries
• Random blog
• Users search
  • Search
• Games
• Tests
• RYXI
  • Сообщества
• Talxy Chat
• Horoscope
• Online
 
Зарегистрируйся!

RYXI > Solaris > Re: Best Practise to implenet NIS if we have all solaris,linux,aix 24 January 2008 22:30:45

  Recent blog posts: 
  They have birthday today: 
  Forums:   
  Discuss: 
  Recent forum topics: 
  Recent forum comments:
  Moderators:

Re: Best Practise to implenet NIS if we have all solaris,linux,aix

Michael Vilain 24 January 2008 22:30:45
 In article
<ae86337b-c943-48fa­-beb3-3aac94c1bf8b@l­1g2000hsa.googlegrou­ps.com>,
prak <back_scriptss@yaho­o.com> wrote:

On Jan 22, 11:06 am, Michael Vilain <vil...@NOspamcop.n­et> wrote:
In article
<08054489-5b3c-424f­-ad62-fd08a82d6...@s­13g2000prd.googlegro­ups.com>,
prak <back_scrip...@yaho­o.com> wrote:
Hi All,
Please let me know how to implement if you have like solaris,linux,aix
servers
best practise like which o.s should i use a NIS master. I hope it
would not be better to have three different nis servers.
My objective of implementing nis is for centralized account
management.
Thanks,
PK
Don't use LINUX for any of the server functions. In many kernels, NFS
and NIS don't work except with other LINUX machines.
Have a master machine sitting in the datacenter that's backed up and
bottle fed regularly. Many site's I've been at also have DNS on this
machine, but YMMV.
Have at least 1 NIS slave machine on each network segment or use a
multi-homed system across a couple network segments. Some sites I've
been at have also used this as a file server.
Be careful of having lines in the groups map get to long. I think 1024
is the longest.
Think carefully about groups. If you're going to use NFS, the maximum
number of groups a user can be in is something like 16 or 32 (I forget,
I'll let you research that). If you need to use more than that you'll
have to use ACLs on machines that support that.
Use automounter for user and project directories. If files are stored
on servers that are backed up, you won't be backing up desktops. It
will save lots of network overhead.
Are you going to manage a hosts map or use DHCP? I don't know what that
entails but be sure the ranges are mapped in local DNS. Otherwise,
you'll have reverse lookup problems and slow remote logins.
--
DeeDee, don't press that button! DeeDee! NO! Dee...
Hi Michael,
Thanks for replying. So you are suggiesting either sun solaris or
IBMAix as a Nis Master and all the linux hostes to be nis clients
is above my understaing right?
Can you tell me how to connect Aix servers as NIS client to Solaris
nis servers.
Main purpose of implementing the NIS is i dont want the user to be
created on all the differnt version of unix. Create one id on NIS
master server and that user should able to login in all the servers.
Thanks
PK

Yes, you understand me correctly. Either AIX or Solaris should be the
NIS master or slave systems AND don't use Linux as a NFS fileserver.

Can't help you with anything regarding AIX. Never worked on it. You
should post in their news groups for specific help with them.

You've got the strategy right by maintaining the accounts on an NIS
master and pushing the maps to the NIS slave systems.

--
DeeDee, don't press that button! DeeDee! NO! Dee...



Add comment
Chris Ridd 23 January 2008 11:29:23 permanent link ]
 On 2008-01-22 23:22:01 +0000, andrew@cucumber.dem­on.co.uk (Andrew
Gabriel) said:

In article <vilain-9D752E.0035­2422012008@comcast.d­ca.giganews.com>,
Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.n­et> writes:
Yes, you understand me correctly. Either AIX or Solaris should be the
NIS master or slave systems AND don't use Linux as a NFS fileserver.
Linux as an NFS fileserver -- agreed, just don't go there.

I've heard plenty of anecdotes about Linux being a terrible NFS server
but I haven't really found any good list of the actual problems
encountered in the various Linux versions. Is such a thing around, or
does everyone "just know" that Linux can't serve NFS well?

And does "well" mean fast, correct, reliable, compatible, or something else?

Cheers,

Chris

Add comment
Reginald Beardsley 23 January 2008 18:35:40 permanent link ]
 Chris Ridd wrote:
On 2008-01-22 23:22:01 +0000, andrew@cucumber.dem­on.co.uk (Andrew
Gabriel) said:
In article <vilain-9D752E.0035­2422012008@comcast.d­ca.giganews.com>,
Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.n­et> writes:
Yes, you understand me correctly. Either AIX or Solaris should be the
NIS master or slave systems AND don't use Linux as a NFS fileserver.
Linux as an NFS fileserver -- agreed, just don't go there.
I've heard plenty of anecdotes about Linux being a terrible NFS server
but I haven't really found any good list of the actual problems
encountered in the various Linux versions. Is such a thing around, or
does everyone "just know" that Linux can't serve NFS well?
And does "well" mean fast, correct, reliable, compatible, or something
else?
Cheers,
Chris
A friend of mine told me a real horror story about Linux based NFS in a
seismic processing shop. They'd set the largest documented block size
for transfers and would experience weird failures under load. After
several months of this someone dug into the kernel source. As I recall
him telling me, the kernel source comment accompanying setting the
larger block size was:

// I hope no one ever selects this

Seems it didn't reliably transfer the entire block because the logic
needed had never been fully implemented. Hopefully it is now, but it's
certainly typical of my experience w/ Linux.

Reg
Add comment
Chris Ridd 24 January 2008 11:56:12 permanent link ]
 On 2008-01-23 20:53:28 +0000, Chris Cox <notccox@notairmail­.net> said:

Chris Ridd wrote:
On 2008-01-22 23:22:01 +0000, andrew@cucumber.dem­on.co.uk (Andrew
Gabriel) said:
In article <vilain-9D752E.0035­2422012008@comcast.d­ca.giganews.com>,
Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.n­et> writes:
Yes, you understand me correctly. Either AIX or Solaris should be the
NIS master or slave systems AND don't use Linux as a NFS fileserver.
Linux as an NFS fileserver -- agreed, just don't go there.
I've heard plenty of anecdotes about Linux being a terrible NFS server
but I haven't really found any good list of the actual problems
encountered in the various Linux versions. Is such a thing around, or
does everyone "just know" that Linux can't serve NFS well?
And does "well" mean fast, correct, reliable, compatible, or something
else?
We have had ZERO problems with our SUSE based NFS servers. We serve
terabytes of disk and have been doing so for hundreds of users on
hundreds of clients, even loaded for more than 5 years.

Were those clients also Linux, or a mix of things?

Cheers,

Chris

Add comment
Chris Cox 24 January 2008 22:30:45 permanent link ]
 On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 07:56 +0000, Chris Ridd wrote:
On 2008-01-23 20:53:28 +0000, Chris Cox <notccox@notairmail­.net> said:
...
We have had ZERO problems with our SUSE based NFS servers. We serve
terabytes of disk and have been doing so for hundreds of users on
hundreds of clients, even loaded for more than 5 years.
Were those clients also Linux, or a mix of things?

We have a mixture of clients:

AIX 4.3.3, 5.1, 5.2 5.3
HPUX 11.00, 11.11 (11i), 11.23 (11iv2) (PARISC and Itanium)
Red Hat 7.1, 7.3, 8.0, 9
RHEL 2, 3, 4, 5, 5.1
SUSE 8.2, 9.0, 9.2, 9.3, 10, 10.1, 10.2, 10.3
SLES 8, 9, 10
(both SLES and RHEL are supported 32bit and 64bit
as well as IBM zSeries under zVM)
Solaris 2.6, 7, 8, 9, 10 (x86 and SPARC)
SCO Unixware 7.1.4
NCR SVR4 (had to make it an NIS slave, old style NIS)
OSF/1 (Tru64 or Digital Unix) 4.0, 5.1

We are a software ISV. I've been administrating
and porting code across all flavors since about 1983.

NIS servers run off of two SLES 10 boxes. Primary NFS
servers serve up terabytes of shared disk to all of
the clients listed above (including the home directories
currently split across two growable 800G areas each).
Same storage areas are also made available via SMB, ftp
and http protocols. We converted away from direct
attached SCSI to fibre SAN (some 2G some 4G) for storage
this year and increased our storage from 12TB to about
65TB (not all of that is allocated today). Because
of that conversion, our NIS/NFS servers are only showing
116 days of uptime. Prior to that, the servers had
been up for over a year (we are supposed to have a
mandatory outage each year, it didn't happen in
2007).

Network is a Cisco based 1Gbit to the host with
10GigE inter switch delivering full 1Gbit (2Gbit) bandwidth
host to host. However, this infrastructure existed
even back when we were 100Mbit.

Obviously, we do have some high risk clients, especially
those that can only do NFS via udp. Because those platforms
are not heavy users, we haven't seen any issue yet and eventually
those platforms will die off (much like the fact that we
finally killed HPUX 10.0 and Solaris 2.5.1 ... for example).

Hope that helps....

Add comment
 

Add new comment

As:
Login:  Password:  
 
 
  
 
Пожалуйста, относитесь к собеседникам уважительно, не используйте нецензурные слова, не злоупотребляйте заглавными буквами, не публикуйте рекламу и объявления о купле/продаже, а также материалы нарушающие сетевой этикет или УК РФ.


RYXI > Solaris > Re: Best Practise to implenet NIS if we have all solaris,linux,aix 24 January 2008 22:30:45

see also:
if you'll change Kenny's island with…
tomorrow, go care a bowl
Re: if you will comb Jay's station…
пройди тесты:
see also:

  Copyright © 2001—2008 RYXI
Idea: Miсhael Monashev
Помощь и задать вопросы можно в сообществе support.ryxi.com.
Сообщения об ошибках оставляем в сообществе bugs.ryxi.com.
Предложения и комментарии пишем в сообществе suggest.ryxi.com.
Информация для родителей.
Write us at:
If you would like to report an abuse of our service, such as a spam message, please .