Robert Hanson <roberth@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> what about any possible security issues for having a
> separate /boot ??
Actually, a separate /boot can be _unmounted_, which is a
nice option. Once the system boots, /boot is of no further
use.
In fact, in the rare cases when I use MD for software RAID-1,
I have each disk with their own /boot filesystems and I keep
them unmounted. I have a script which installs LILO/GRUB by
mounting each separately.
> what about other physical or logical reasons?
> i value your input Bryan yet why do people even mention a
> separate /boot unless it is on an entirely different drive
> that is only mirrored and not part of the hardware RAID5
> for almost obvious reasons...
Because people are talking _software_ RAID-5 via MD.
Software RAID-5 is not something I will touch, and it goes
against every fabric of proper system design -- _unless_
that's all the system does. I.e., your server is just a
storage device for software RAID-5 as part of a split
"service" and "storage" server design.
Even Intel is putting the IOP332 XScale processor on the
mainboard now, and will most likely add it into the chipset
(at the I/O Controller Hub, ICH, aka "southbridge") in the
future. Tying up the CPU-memory interconnect with GBps of
_redundant_ storage streams is far more inefficient than just
one copy -- that only requires sub-GBps -- through an
intelligent IOP at the ICH. Hence Intel's new server design
move.
It's the same reason why we don't use PCs for networking
equipment. They are designed for data processing, not raw
data manipulation and transfer.
--
Bryan J. Smith | Sent from Yahoo Mail
mailto:b.j.smith@xxxxxxxx | (please excuse any
http://thebs413.blogspot.com/ | missing headers)
