load balancing problem

[inverse]

Alan wrote:

>   NFS mounted?  Don't.  If NFS goes away, any application using those
> directories will lock, and be unkillable.

it's part of a red hat cluster, and it's managed by that software
suite. If a machine dies a transparent switch occurs.
If it fails I'll get angry with red hat  --so far it didn't happen
(and I didn't bother finding out if it's nfs-based or something else).
This feature is not critical, ok. I can live without it. It just
works, and simplifies analisys a lot.
I've got other reasons to be angry with red had, but this is not the case.

Personally I like sshfs much more than nfs, but it's prone to similar
problems as those above.
So I won't use it.


bye,
inverse