Re: [gentoo-user] The LIGHTEST web server (just for serving files)?

[microcai <microcai@fedoraproject.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1645 bytes --]


http://code.google.com/p/bashttpd/

run with systemd or xinetd



于 2011年11月14日 18:05, J. Roeleveld 写道:
> On Sat, November 12, 2011 2:11 pm, YoYo Siska wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 07:40:08PM +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote:
>>> During my drive home, something hit my brain: why not have the 'master'
>>> server share the distfiles dir via NFS?
>>>
>>> So, the question now becomes: what's the drawback/benefit of NFS-sharing
>>> vs
>>> HTTP-sharing? The scenario is back-end LAN at the office, thus, a
>>> trusted
>>> network by definition.
>>
>> NFS doesn't like when it looses connection to the server. The only
>> problems I had ever with NFS were because I forgot to unmout it before a
>> server restart or when I  took a computer (laptop) off to another
>> network...
> 
> NFS-shares can work, but these need to be umounted before network goes.
> If server goes, problems can occur there as well.
> But that is true with any server/client filesharing. (CIFS/Samba, for
> instance)
> 
>> Otherwise it works well, esp. when mounted ro on the clients, however
>> for distfiles it might make sense to allow the clients download and save
>> tarballs that are not there yet ;), though I never used it with many
>> computer emerging/downloading same same stuff, so can't say if locking
>> etc works correctly...
> 
> Locking works correctly, have had 5 machines share the same NFS-shared
> distfiles and all downloading the source-files.
> 
>> And with NFS the clients won't duplicate the files in their own
>> distfiles directories ;)
> 
> Big plus, for me :)
> 
> --
> Joost
> 
> 



[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]