[9fans] Plan9 topology

[9fans] Plan9 topology

[Duke Normandin]

Just read:

http://lsub.org/magic/man2html/1/0intro

[quote]
Plan 9 is a distributed computing environment assembled from separate
machines acting as terminals, CPU servers, and file servers.[/quote]

Does the above imply, that ideally Plan9 should be running on a LAN?
Not so good as the OS on a stand-alone box?
--
Duke

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[dukeofperl]

On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, Duke Normandin wrote:

> Just read:
>
> http://lsub.org/magic/man2html/1/0intro
>
> [quote]
> Plan 9 is a distributed computing environment assembled from separate
> machines acting as terminals, CPU servers, and file servers.[/quote]
>
> Does the above imply, that ideally Plan9 should be running on a LAN?
> Not so good as the OS on a stand-alone box?
>

Then I went to:

http://lsub.org/magic/man2html/4/0intro

and got a better handle on what is meant by "server". Not another
machine on the network, but any application that "serves up files" for
whatever reason. Correct?
--
Duke

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[David Leimbach]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1170 bytes --]

On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Duke Normandin <dukeofperl@ml1.net> wrote:

> Just read:
>
> http://lsub.org/magic/man2html/1/0intro
>
> [quote]
> Plan 9 is a distributed computing environment assembled from separate
> machines acting as terminals, CPU servers, and file servers.[/quote]
>
> Does the above imply, that ideally Plan9 should be running on a LAN?
> Not so good as the OS on a stand-alone box?
> --
> Duke
>
> A lot of us with just one machine to spare tend to install the system, then
build and configure a CPU/Auth/FS server on one box, or even just a VMWare
or other virtualization instance.

With plan 9 you do not have to run your CPU, authentication and file system
parts of your computing system all in one place

>From there we can log into our plan 9 server using unix programs like
drawterm, or even 9vx, each of which are more or less ports of Plan 9 to
other OSes with different pros and cons.

With plan 9 you do not have to run your CPU, authentication and file system
parts of your computing system all in one place, and really, you can just
run a terminal and play around with that to get started if you like.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1645 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Skip Tavakkolian]

if the intent is to get a full understanding of what an operational
Plan 9 environment is like, using VMware or Qemu to create VM's for
various roles (auth/cpu, fs, term) connected by a virtual network is
an excellent option. i've successfully used this setup for
experimenting/testing and for demos.

-Skip

On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 10:50 AM, David Leimbach <leimy2k@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Duke Normandin <dukeofperl@ml1.net> wrote:
>>
>> Just read:
>>
>> http://lsub.org/magic/man2html/1/0intro
>>
>> [quote]
>> Plan 9 is a distributed computing environment assembled from separate
>> machines acting as terminals, CPU servers, and file servers.[/quote]
>>
>> Does the above imply, that ideally Plan9 should be running on a LAN?
>> Not so good as the OS on a stand-alone box?
>> --
>> Duke
>>
> A lot of us with just one machine to spare tend to install the system, then
> build and configure a CPU/Auth/FS server on one box, or even just a VMWare
> or other virtualization instance.
> With plan 9 you do not have to run your CPU, authentication and file system
> parts of your computing system all in one place
> From there we can log into our plan 9 server using unix programs like
> drawterm, or even 9vx, each of which are more or less ports of Plan 9 to
> other OSes with different pros and cons.
> With plan 9 you do not have to run your CPU, authentication and file system
> parts of your computing system all in one place, and really, you can just
> run a terminal and play around with that to get started if you like.
>
>
>
>

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Duke Normandin]

On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, Skip Tavakkolian wrote:

> if the intent is to get a full understanding of what an operational
> Plan 9 environment is like, using VMware or Qemu to create VM's for
> various roles (auth/cpu, fs, term) connected by a virtual network is
> an excellent option. I've successfully used this setup for
> experimenting/testing and for demos.

Sounds like _a lot_ of fooling around! I've set up numerous *nix LANs
before, but don't have one at the moment. How much memory would a
machine need to set up all those VMs?
--
Duke

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Jacob Todd]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 791 bytes --]

Maybe a gigabyte if you used a separate vm for cpu, auth and the fs. You can
combine cpu/auth and even the file server into one if you wanted.
On Jan 13, 2011 2:34 PM, "Duke Normandin" <dukeofperl@ml1.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, Skip Tavakkolian wrote:
>
>> if the intent is to get a full understanding of what an operational
>> Plan 9 environment is like, using VMware or Qemu to create VM's for
>> various roles (auth/cpu, fs, term) connected by a virtual network is
>> an excellent option. I've successfully used this setup for
>> experimenting/testing and for demos.
>
> Sounds like _a lot_ of fooling around! I've set up numerous *nix LANs
> before, but don't have one at the moment. How much memory would a
> machine need to set up all those VMs?
> --
> Duke
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1018 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Duke Normandin]

On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, David Leimbach wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Duke Normandin <dukeofperl@ml1.net> wrote:
>
> > Just read:
> >
> > http://lsub.org/magic/man2html/1/0intro
> >
> > [quote]
> > Plan 9 is a distributed computing environment assembled from separate
> > machines acting as terminals, CPU servers, and file servers.[/quote]
> >
> > Does the above imply, that ideally Plan9 should be running on a LAN?
> > Not so good as the OS on a stand-alone box?
> > --
> > Duke
> >
> > A lot of us with just one machine to spare tend to install the system, then
> build and configure a CPU/Auth/FS server on one box, or even just a VMWare
> or other virtualization instance.

OK! So it _is_ possible to run a "full" Plan9 OS in one partition, on
one machine?

> With plan 9 you do not have to run your CPU, authentication and file system
> parts of your computing system all in one place

I understand. In bygone days, Unix shops ran exactly that way. A
central file server box, with terminals 9or workstations) connected to
it.

> From there we can log into our plan 9 server using unix programs like
> drawterm, or even 9vx, each of which are more or less ports of Plan 9 to
> other OSes with different pros and cons.

You bet!

> With plan 9 you do not have to run your CPU, authentication and file
> system parts of your computing system all in one place, and really,
> you can just run a terminal and play around with that to get started
> if you like.

I don't have any extra boxes to play around with at the moment. So if
I can let one partition be Plan9 - in all it's glory - so much the
better.
--
Duke

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Skip Tavakkolian]

depending on the host os, 1g is sufficient. i've never needed to use
more than 256M for plan9 vm's.

On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Duke Normandin <dukeofperl@ml1.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, Skip Tavakkolian wrote:
>
>> if the intent is to get a full understanding of what an operational
>> Plan 9 environment is like, using VMware or Qemu to create VM's for
>> various roles (auth/cpu, fs, term) connected by a virtual network is
>> an excellent option. I've successfully used this setup for
>> experimenting/testing and for demos.
>
> Sounds like _a lot_ of fooling around! I've set up numerous *nix LANs
> before, but don't have one at the moment. How much memory would a
> machine need to set up all those VMs?
> --
> Duke
>
>

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Bakul Shah]

On Thu, 13 Jan 2011 11:16:25 PST Skip Tavakkolian <skip.tavakkolian@gmail.com>  wrote:
> if the intent is to get a full understanding of what an operational
> Plan 9 environment is like, using VMware or Qemu to create VM's for
> various roles (auth/cpu, fs, term) connected by a virtual network is
> an excellent option. i've successfully used this setup for
> experimenting/testing and for demos.

Would be nice if there was a script that did this.

In a past company we had added an ability to create virtual
hosts (each with its own network stack + interfaces) and
virtual nets to our version of FreeBSD.  A grad student
modified a gui program to draw network topologies and
generate a shell script from it to set up these nodes and
nets on a single FreeBSD box.  We did the opposite of what
Sun was touting. "The computer is the network" :-)

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[John Floren]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 01/13/2011 11:40 AM, Duke Normandin wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, David Leimbach wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Duke Normandin <dukeofperl@ml1.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Just read:
>>>
>>> http://lsub.org/magic/man2html/1/0intro
>>>
>>> [quote]
>>> Plan 9 is a distributed computing environment assembled from separate
>>> machines acting as terminals, CPU servers, and file servers.[/quote]
>>>
>>> Does the above imply, that ideally Plan9 should be running on a LAN?
>>> Not so good as the OS on a stand-alone box?
>>> --
>>> Duke
>>>
>>> A lot of us with just one machine to spare tend to install the system, then
>> build and configure a CPU/Auth/FS server on one box, or even just a VMWare
>> or other virtualization instance.
>
> OK! So it _is_ possible to run a "full" Plan9 OS in one partition, on
> one machine?
>
>> With plan 9 you do not have to run your CPU, authentication and file system
>> parts of your computing system all in one place
>
> I understand. In bygone days, Unix shops ran exactly that way. A
> central file server box, with terminals 9or workstations) connected to
> it.
>
>> From there we can log into our plan 9 server using unix programs like
>> drawterm, or even 9vx, each of which are more or less ports of Plan 9 to
>> other OSes with different pros and cons.
>
> You bet!
>
>> With plan 9 you do not have to run your CPU, authentication and file
>> system parts of your computing system all in one place, and really,
>> you can just run a terminal and play around with that to get started
>> if you like.
>
> I don't have any extra boxes to play around with at the moment. So if
> I can let one partition be Plan9 - in all it's glory - so much the
> better.

If you only have one computer available and have to dual-boot, you can
actually do pretty good with a simple, standalone terminal (this is what
gets installed by default). You can then get an account at one or two of
the public Plan 9 servers and connect from your terminal.

If you have a second computer available that you can devote to Plan 9 (a
Pentium II with 128 MB of RAM will perform admirably), I recommend that
you find the instructions on the wiki for setting up a standalone CPU
server
(http://www.plan9.bell-labs.com/wiki/plan9/Configuring_a_standalone_CPU_server/index.html)
and follow them. You will end up with a Plan 9 cpu/auth/file server all
on one box, to which you can then connect from a Plan 9 terminal, 9vx on
Linux, or drawterm on Linux/OS X/Windows.

Personally, I've run at least half a dozen Plan 9 servers over the
years, always installing a full cpu/auth/file server, usually on any PC
I can scrape together out of the parts bin or the loading dock. Then I
just connect from my desktop using drawterm, or I use the Thinkpad with
Plan 9 installed as a terminal.

Good luck; Plan 9 is a very fun system.


John
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJNL1tzAAoJEJ9D0dbIh7TLDcIIAJFy25HLbQaINe/1wsomA2d4
Ha8xzD/q0VTndGUI7D+qYQ/EdCr3WwEmTzZQTBho3Ykm0DEnYgLAxSyqiZz/2slP
vGamc/5NQfNfiRohIDiXhnuqvBrarRaunHtjHtlBiU23irPR0twSOX6c7syogeEv
/2rrSgVYnFKlfuQBE/tdiVk1maaqqveQSXCzbOKdt91B2qGTotFmgaP///1H5cYe
NJk3Zj4U5w/4yVbxLYmkIv9SRQpiJMpEvdAy0sul5pYjGPhd6NnBcsepOwB12f0E
Ef/lXHVK6XgXk0I8ptWZbk0Lj6Ddmb28sTS2kdnbhTa15KaMPzwhVWedx0yrdo8=
=5J9Z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Duke Normandin]

On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, Skip Tavakkolian wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Duke Normandin <dukeofperl@ml1.net> wrote:
> > On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, Skip Tavakkolian wrote:
> >
> >> if the intent is to get a full understanding of what an operational
> >> Plan 9 environment is like, using VMware or Qemu to create VM's for
> >> various roles (auth/cpu, fs, term) connected by a virtual network is
> >> an excellent option. I've successfully used this setup for
> >> experimenting/testing and for demos.
> >
> > Sounds like _a lot_ of fooling around! I've set up numerous *nix LANs
> > before, but don't have one at the moment. How much memory would a
> > machine need to set up all those VMs?

> depending on the host os, 1g is sufficient. i've never needed to use
> more than 256M for plan9 vm's.

The box that I'd be using has a total of 1G RAM. If I do this, it
would be on top of Xubuntu 10.10. But the VM thing doesn't really
appeal to me.

I could run a headless box as a Plan9 auth/cpu, fs server. Then, if I
want to this Plan9 server, is there a minimum Plan9 install that I
could put on the spare partition that I have? Kinda like what I had
for a long time: a 486DX running FreeBSD as a mailserver; another
running as a webserver; another couple running primary and slave
nameservers; and one dual-homed FreeBSD box routing and doing
firewall/natd. Had a couple of Linux and FreeBSD workstations hung on
this LAN. Those 486DX _never_ hiccuped! (Thank you UPS!!!)

The above sounds like a job for Plan9 :) But my point is - is that I
don't need to set up a LAN to enjoy Linux or FreeBSD. Can I use Plan9
standalone in a dedicated partition?
--
Duke

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[erik quanstrom]

On Thu Jan 13 14:47:52 EST 2011, bakul+plan9@bitblocks.com wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jan 2011 11:16:25 PST Skip Tavakkolian <skip.tavakkolian@gmail.com>  wrote:
> > if the intent is to get a full understanding of what an operational
> > Plan 9 environment is like, using VMware or Qemu to create VM's for
> > various roles (auth/cpu, fs, term) connected by a virtual network is
> > an excellent option. i've successfully used this setup for
> > experimenting/testing and for demos.
>
> Would be nice if there was a script that did this.

thanks for volunteering!

- erik

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Duke Normandin]

On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, John Floren wrote:

[snip]

> If you only have one computer available and have to dual-boot, you can
> actually do pretty good with a simple, standalone terminal (this is what
> gets installed by default). You can then get an account at one or two of
> the public Plan 9 servers and connect from your terminal.

Do you mean the Plan 9 terminal that you mention below? Roughly, what
does this installation include?

> If you have a second computer available that you can devote to Plan 9 (a
> Pentium II with 128 MB of RAM will perform admirably), I recommend that
> you find the instructions on the wiki for setting up a standalone CPU
> server
> (http://www.plan9.bell-labs.com/wiki/plan9/Configuring_a_standalone_CPU_server/index.html)
> and follow them. You will end up with a Plan 9 cpu/auth/file server all
> on one box, to which you can then connect from a Plan 9 terminal, 9vx on
> Linux, or drawterm on Linux/OS X/Windows.

I see! Plan 9 is essential a "server" OS. That's it!  That's all! It
can't be run as a client and server all on one box.

> Personally, I've run at least half a dozen Plan 9 servers over the
> years, always installing a full cpu/auth/file server, usually on any PC
> I can scrape together out of the parts bin or the loading dock. Then I
> just connect from my desktop using drawterm, or I use the Thinkpad with
> Plan 9 installed as a terminal.

Been there; done that! with FreeBSD. :)

> Good luck; Plan 9 is a very fun system.

Sounds like it might be. Thanks for the input!
--
Duke

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[John Floren]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 01/13/2011 12:24 PM, Duke Normandin wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, John Floren wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> If you only have one computer available and have to dual-boot, you can
>> actually do pretty good with a simple, standalone terminal (this is what
>> gets installed by default). You can then get an account at one or two of
>> the public Plan 9 servers and connect from your terminal.
>
> Do you mean the Plan 9 terminal that you mention below? Roughly, what
> does this installation include?
>

Yes. You just stick in the CD and do a basic install. When you're done,
you get all the programs that ship with Plan 9; it's very usable, you
can connect to various Plan 9 servers or FTP to move files around and stuff.

Used to be, when I'd visit home and get stuck on dialup, I'd use my
laptop as a standalone terminal and just dial up and connect to my
server when I needed to grab a file or push one up.

>> If you have a second computer available that you can devote to Plan 9 (a
>> Pentium II with 128 MB of RAM will perform admirably), I recommend that
>> you find the instructions on the wiki for setting up a standalone CPU
>> server
>> (http://www.plan9.bell-labs.com/wiki/plan9/Configuring_a_standalone_CPU_server/index.html)
>> and follow them. You will end up with a Plan 9 cpu/auth/file server all
>> on one box, to which you can then connect from a Plan 9 terminal, 9vx on
>> Linux, or drawterm on Linux/OS X/Windows.
>
> I see! Plan 9 is essential a "server" OS. That's it!  That's all! It
> can't be run as a client and server all on one box.
>

You *can* sit down at a cpu/auth/file server and work, but it's just not
very usable--consider it an administration console.


>> Personally, I've run at least half a dozen Plan 9 servers over the
>> years, always installing a full cpu/auth/file server, usually on any PC
>> I can scrape together out of the parts bin or the loading dock. Then I
>> just connect from my desktop using drawterm, or I use the Thinkpad with
>> Plan 9 installed as a terminal.
>
> Been there; done that! with FreeBSD. :)
>
>> Good luck; Plan 9 is a very fun system.
>
> Sounds like it might be. Thanks for the input!

I think you mentioned in another message that you have a headless box
available; I recommend temporarily hooking that up to a monitor,
keyboard, and mouse, then installing a standalone cpu/auth/file server
on it. Once you're done, you can try using drawterm from Windows or
Linux or whatever you have to test the configuration.

If the configuration is good, you can go ahead and install Plan 9 as a
terminal on your spare partition, or just keep working from drawterm,
which is what I usually do (the graphics performance is better).


John
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJNL2NEAAoJEJ9D0dbIh7TLtt0H/2heoig4frHiOBBOxPK7WBxd
j17D3G2U1fOtpz6XEZij/TKMiRcY4xBQve/9S/nVpI3neVx9oarqVWZ3Ycv5ehou
bViHe3bQMIesRAiSSwtF3Ce8E/KHzwQ8OsepuYln33OhCs6uSLlokXZYaCAFUPGe
WXOteKAqQ77eZS+BD3SF5lcMucQRgpvuh7zNItDQjGV9JV70J41KsWVK9XkbOspk
4e4jea2cweJbs9hWxLCKNYkTKydgGzC7cir9FhdCqrBZoFmd02Acpiy/aWYxXK0n
0wfHh8towKLGlLGQ1NnBqf2sU74nd0sH+gN/qedq01b5+G+SsHsAY0PXD2hLs5o=
=LTbR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Tassilo Philipp]

> Can I use Plan9 standalone in a dedicated partition?

Yes, of course!

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Duke Normandin]

On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, John Floren wrote:

[snip]

> Yes. You just stick in the CD and do a basic install. When you're
> done, you get all the programs that ship with Plan 9; it's very
> usable, you can connect to various Plan 9 servers or FTP to move
> files around and stuff.

I see! I mis-understood what you meant by "Plan 9 terminal". I thought
that the Plan 9 Live CD gave you a choice of either installing the
Plan 9 server or a Plan 9 client/terminal. I now see that that there
are terminals available on various OSes to connect to a Plan 9
server. Turns out that I can install `drawterm' version 20091003-1
directly from my Xubuntu box - using Synaptic. Didn't see `9vx'
though. I'll have to Google it. I did see that `wily', an Linux ACME
clone is available. Guess what I did? :)

[snip]

> You *can* sit down at a cpu/auth/file server and work, but it's just not
> very usable--consider it an administration console.

Got it!

[snip]

> I think you mentioned in another message that you have a headless box
> available; I recommend temporarily hooking that up to a monitor,
> keyboard, and mouse, then installing a standalone cpu/auth/file server
> on it. Once you're done, you can try using drawterm from Windows or
> Linux or whatever you have to test the configuration.

I just checked - it's a 166Mhz P-I with 98M RAM and 4.5G HDD. Made a
good dedicated mail server. May not have enough gonads for a Plan 9
server though.

> If the configuration is good, you can go ahead and install Plan 9 as
> a terminal on your spare partition, or just keep working from
> drawterm, which is what I usually do (the graphics performance is
> better).

So I can install Plan 9 as a client/terminal from the CD! But I
wouldn't waste a 30G BSD partition on that. Which is where I was going
to put Plan 9. I might just wipe the 4G Native Oberon partition, and
put the Plan 9 terminal there. Although this box that I use
multi-boots, why bother installing Plan 9 as a terminal on a dedicated
partition, when I can connect from Linux using `drawterm' or `9vx'.

Thanks for the input!
--
Duke

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Brian L. Stuart]

> I could run a headless box as a Plan9 auth/cpu, fs server.
> Then, if I
> want to this Plan9 server, is there a minimum Plan9 install
> that I
> could put on the spare partition that I have?

With this setup available, there are several ways
you can go.  As a lot of people have suggested, you
can install a cpu/auth/fs server on the headless
machine and use drawterm to be a terminal talking
to him.  An even more Plan9-like way of doing it
is to net-boot a Plan9 terminal from your cpu/auth/fs
machine.  If you want to boot your main box that
way, you can without installing anything on it.
>From within Linux, you can do the same thing in
virtualbox.  In fact, I have a virtualbox terminal
running right now on my machine.  It's net booted,
taking its Plan9 kernel from a Plan9 machine that
provides DHCP service and it mounts its root from
a Ken FS machine.  At home, I use 9vx taking its
root from a Plan9 fossil/venti file server.

> for a long time: a 486DX running FreeBSD as a mailserver;
> another
> running as a webserver; another couple running primary and
> slave
> nameservers; and one dual-homed FreeBSD box routing and
> doing
> firewall/natd.

The only problem you'd run into there is that Plan9
doesn't currently have a NAT implementation.

> The above sounds like a job for Plan9 :) But my point is -
> is that I
> don't need to set up a LAN to enjoy Linux or FreeBSD. Can I
> use Plan9
> standalone in a dedicated partition?

Yes, the default install from the CD sets up a
stand-alone machine.  And for most of us, that's
the starting point from which we configure any
specialized machines such as cpu, auth, or file
servers.  And you can get a pretty good feel for
what Plan9 is about with a stand-alone machine.
However, some parts of the system make a lot more
sense when you experience them in a networked
environment.  Auth is a good example of this.

But whichever path(s) you take, I hope you'll find
Plan9 is a great system, just as we do.

BLS

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Brian L. Stuart]

> I see! I mis-understood what you meant by "Plan 9
> terminal". I thought
> that the Plan 9 Live CD gave you a choice of either
> installing the
> Plan 9 server or a Plan 9 client/terminal. I now see that
> that there
> are terminals available on various OSes to connect to a
> Plan 9
> server.

It has become a little confusing over
the last 20 years.  In a way too brief
way, here are the basic incarnations of
Plan9:

- Natively running the current Plan9 kernel
   - Stand-alone terminal with its own fs
   - Terminal (possibly diskless) talking
     to an external fs
   - CPU, auth, or file server (or some
     combination)
   All of these are running Plan9 as their
   "bare metal" OS
- Same as above but in a virtual machine,
  such as virtualbox, vmware, qemu, etc.
- Ken's FS: a file server that runs on
  bare hardware
- 9vx: a port of the Plan9 kernel to vx32
  that allows a full Plan9 system to run
  as a user-level application on another
  system, including Linux, FreeBSD, Mac OSX
- drawterm: an earlier port of a limited
  Plan9 kernel that's similar to a terminal
  connecting to a remote CPU server
- P9P (aka Plan9 ports, Plan9 from user
  space): a port of the Plan9 user apps
  to POSIX-like systems
And just for fun these can all play together.
At the moment, I'm using a MacOS machine
that has one file system mounted using
the P9P 9pfuse program.  It's also running
an instance of virtualbox that's net booted
a Plan9 terminal.  There's also an instance
of 9vx running which is accessing the file
system mounted via P9P.  All of these pieces
are talking to a Plan9 CPU server which
in turn uses a Ken FS file server.

>  I did see that `wily', an
> Linux ACME
> clone is available. Guess what I did? :)

I remember playing with wily quite a lot
a while back.  With Russ's P9P port of
acme, though, you can run the real acme
as a Linux app too.

> I just checked - it's a 166Mhz P-I with 98M RAM and 4.5G
> HDD. Made a
> good dedicated mail server. May not have enough gonads for
> a Plan 9
> server though.

I wouldn't dismiss it entirely.  My old
Plan9 CPU/auth/file server at home had
a very similar configuration.

BLS

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Duke Normandin]

>On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, Brian L. Stuart wrote:

[snip]

> It has become a little confusing over the last 20 years.  In a way
> too brief way, here are the basic incarnations of Plan9:

>
> - Natively running the current Plan9 kernel
>    - Stand-alone terminal with its own fs
>    - Terminal (possibly diskless) talking to an external fs
>    - CPU, auth, or file server (or some combination)
>
>    All of these are running Plan9 as their "bare metal" OS
>
> - Same as above but in a virtual machine, such as virtualbox,
>   vmware, qemu, etc.
> - Ken's FS: a file server that runs on bare hardware
> - 9vx: a port of the Plan9 kernel to vx32 that allows a full Plan9
>   system to run as a user-level application on another system,
>   including Linux, FreeBSD, Mac OSX
> - drawterm: an earlier port of a limited Plan9 kernel that's similar
>   to a terminal connecting to a remote CPU server
> - P9P (aka Plan9 ports, Plan9 from user space): a port of the Plan9
>   user apps to POSIX-like systems
>
> And just for fun these can all play together.  At the moment, I'm
> using a MacOS machine that has one file system mounted using the P9P
> 9pfuse program.  It's also running an instance of virtualbox that's
> net booted a Plan9 terminal.  There's also an instance of 9vx
> running which is accessing the file system mounted via P9P.  All of
> these pieces are talking to a Plan9 CPU server which in turn uses a
> Ken FS file server.

I *know* that I'm going to get myself into trouble, hanging around a
bunch of Plan 9 hackers - like you seem to be :) My wife just made me
get rid of a bunch of P-IIIs that would have been great for this new
venture. Shoot!!  (that's  sh#t with 2 Os )

[snip]

> > I just checked - it's a 166Mhz P-I with 98M RAM and 4.5G HDD. Made
> > a good dedicated mail server. May not have enough gonads for a
> > Plan 9 server though.  >
>
> I wouldn't dismiss it entirely.  My old Plan9 CPU/auth/file server
> at home had a very similar configuration.

Then I'll have to give it a shot. Then go looking for some more recent
hardware! Here we go again ... :D
--
Duke

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Duke Normandin]

On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, Brian L. Stuart wrote:

> > I could run a headless box as a Plan9 auth/cpu, fs server.  Then,
> > if I want to this Plan9 server, is there a minimum Plan9 install
> > that I could put on the spare partition that I have?
>
> With this setup available, there are several ways you can go.  As a
> lot of people have suggested, you can install a cpu/auth/fs server
> on the headless machine and use drawterm to be a terminal talking to

Got it!

> him.  An even more Plan9-like way of doing it is to net-boot a Plan9
> terminal from your cpu/auth/fs machine.  If you want to boot your
> main box that way, you can without installing anything on it.  From
> within Linux, you can do the same thing in virtualbox.  In fact, I
> have a virtualbox terminal running right now on my machine.  It's
> net booted, taking its Plan9 kernel from a Plan9 machine that
> provides DHCP service and it mounts its root from a Ken FS machine.
> At home, I use 9vx taking its root from a Plan9 fossil/venti file
> server.

So the NIC in your Linux box must have to be PXE capable? Truth be
told, I've never set up a net-booting system. The Plan ( server would
have to have enough disk space to store its own stuff, plus the
workstation's file system? Could get dicey, if you've got a few
workstations net-booting, could it not?

> > for a long time: a 486DX running FreeBSD as a mailserver; another
> > running as a webserver; another couple running primary and slave
> > nameservers; and one dual-homed FreeBSD box routing and doing
> > firewall/natd.
>
> The only problem you'd run into there is that Plan9 doesn't
> currently have a NAT implementation.

I should be able to hang the Plan 9 server off my router without any
problems, should I not? The router NATs ..

> > The above sounds like a job for Plan9 :) But my point is - is that
> > I don't need to set up a LAN to enjoy Linux or FreeBSD. Can I use
> > Plan9 standalone in a dedicated partition?
>
> Yes, the default install from the CD sets up a stand-alone machine.
> And for most of us, that's the starting point from which we
> configure any specialized machines such as cpu, auth, or file
> servers.  And you can get a pretty good feel for what Plan9 is about
> with a stand-alone machine.  However, some parts of the system make
> a lot more sense when you experience them in a networked
> environment.  Auth is a good example of this.

I see your point - because Plan 9 was after all, built as a
distributed system. I'll give it a shot on that P-I mentioned in
another post.

> But whichever path(s) you take, I hope you'll find Plan9 is a great
> system, just as we do.

I'm in trouble already ...
--
Duke

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[John Floren]

At Thu, 13 Jan 2011 14:37:52 -0700 (MST),
Duke Normandin wrote:
>
> On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, John Floren wrote:
>
> > I think you mentioned in another message that you have a headless box
> > available; I recommend temporarily hooking that up to a monitor,
> > keyboard, and mouse, then installing a standalone cpu/auth/file server
> > on it. Once you're done, you can try using drawterm from Windows or
> > Linux or whatever you have to test the configuration.
>
> I just checked - it's a 166Mhz P-I with 98M RAM and 4.5G HDD. Made a
> good dedicated mail server. May not have enough gonads for a Plan 9
> server though.

That should do well enough for a basic Plan 9 cpu/auth/file server,
although you may wish to forgo Venti given the small RAM and drive.

>
> > If the configuration is good, you can go ahead and install Plan 9 as
> > a terminal on your spare partition, or just keep working from
> > drawterm, which is what I usually do (the graphics performance is
> > better).
>
> So I can install Plan 9 as a client/terminal from the CD! But I
> wouldn't waste a 30G BSD partition on that. Which is where I was going
> to put Plan 9. I might just wipe the 4G Native Oberon partition, and
> put the Plan 9 terminal there. Although this box that I use
> multi-boots, why bother installing Plan 9 as a terminal on a dedicated
> partition, when I can connect from Linux using `drawterm' or `9vx'.
>
> Thanks for the input!
> --
> Duke
>

I've never bothered to install Plan 9 as a boot option on my desktops;
I prefer to leave them booted into Linux and connect via drawterm,
so as not to disturb my open applications.

On my old laptop, I kept a Plan 9 terminal install because that was
actually quite convenient, and I could boot using the server's root
from most anywhere.


John

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Federico G. Benavento]

yes, I dual booted Plan 9 and windows for years, it worked great,
just boot the cdroom and follow the instructions, choose the empty
space or partition from the installer, etc. you'll end up with a standalone
terminal, no need for a cpu server in the beginning, later you could
just rebuild the kernel and turn it into a cpu server.

if the other OS is linux and uses grub, it'll need an entry for Plan 9
similar to the windows entries, (chainload or something)

if it's windows, it's a bit more hacking booting Plan 9 from vista's loader
but totally doable

ah, and make sure your nic is supported.

On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 5:08 PM, Duke Normandin <dukeofperl@ml1.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, Skip Tavakkolian wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Duke Normandin <dukeofperl@ml1.net> wrote:
>> > On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, Skip Tavakkolian wrote:
>> >
>> >> if the intent is to get a full understanding of what an operational
>> >> Plan 9 environment is like, using VMware or Qemu to create VM's for
>> >> various roles (auth/cpu, fs, term) connected by a virtual network is
>> >> an excellent option. I've successfully used this setup for
>> >> experimenting/testing and for demos.
>> >
>> > Sounds like _a lot_ of fooling around! I've set up numerous *nix LANs
>> > before, but don't have one at the moment. How much memory would a
>> > machine need to set up all those VMs?
>
>> depending on the host os, 1g is sufficient. i've never needed to use
>> more than 256M for plan9 vm's.
>
> The box that I'd be using has a total of 1G RAM. If I do this, it
> would be on top of Xubuntu 10.10. But the VM thing doesn't really
> appeal to me.
>
> I could run a headless box as a Plan9 auth/cpu, fs server. Then, if I
> want to this Plan9 server, is there a minimum Plan9 install that I
> could put on the spare partition that I have? Kinda like what I had
> for a long time: a 486DX running FreeBSD as a mailserver; another
> running as a webserver; another couple running primary and slave
> nameservers; and one dual-homed FreeBSD box routing and doing
> firewall/natd. Had a couple of Linux and FreeBSD workstations hung on
> this LAN. Those 486DX _never_ hiccuped! (Thank you UPS!!!)
>
> The above sounds like a job for Plan9 :) But my point is - is that I
> don't need to set up a LAN to enjoy Linux or FreeBSD. Can I use Plan9
> standalone in a dedicated partition?
> --
> Duke
>
>



--
Federico G. Benavento

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Duke Normandin]

On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, Federico G. Benavento wrote:

> yes, I dual booted Plan 9 and windows for years, it worked great,
> just boot the cdroom and follow the instructions, choose the empty
> space or partition from the installer, etc. you'll end up with a standalone
> terminal, no need for a cpu server in the beginning, later you could
> just rebuild the kernel and turn it into a cpu server.

Cool ..

> if the other OS is linux and uses grub, it'll need an entry for Plan 9
> similar to the windows entries, (chainload or something)

You bet ..

> ah, and make sure your nic is supported.

RTL1839 I think. I'm almost sure that it's supported.

All sounds very encouraging. Addio ...
--
Duke

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[blstuart]

>> him.  An even more Plan9-like way of doing it is to net-boot a Plan9
>> terminal from your cpu/auth/fs machine.  If you want to boot your
>> main box that way, you can without installing anything on it.  From
>> within Linux, you can do the same thing in virtualbox.  In fact, I
>> have a virtualbox terminal running right now on my machine.  It's
>> net booted, taking its Plan9 kernel from a Plan9 machine that
>> provides DHCP service and it mounts its root from a Ken FS machine.
>> At home, I use 9vx taking its root from a Plan9 fossil/venti file
>> server.
>
> So the NIC in your Linux box must have to be PXE capable?

It depends.  If you want to PXE boot the box directly and have
it run the Plan9 kernel natively, then at some point, something
will have to be PXE capable.  That could be the machine's BIOS
or BIOS code on the NIC or even a boot loader loaded from a
disk or CD or...

On the other hand, for the case of virtualbox the PXE booting
support is built into virtualbox itself.

> Truth be
> told, I've never set up a net-booting system.

Because Plan9 was designed from the ground up around a network
organization, it does a good job of supporting net booting.  It's
not hard to set up.

> The Plan ( server would
> have to have enough disk space to store its own stuff, plus the
> workstation's file system? Could get dicey, if you've got a few
> workstations net-booting, could it not?

It can.  The clients all share a single copy of the common files,
but each user will have his own files on the common server.
But the full Plan9 installation is quite managable.  You can
do quite a lot with only a few gig.

> I should be able to hang the Plan 9 server off my router without any
> problems, should I not? The router NATs ..

Definitely.  Most of the Plan9 systems I've run do access the
external net through a NAT box.

>> But whichever path(s) you take, I hope you'll find Plan9 is a great
>> system, just as we do.
>
> I'm in trouble already ...

Rotfl...  You will be assimilated :)  Seriously though, the Plan9
community is a good bunch and everyone is happy to help anyone
who genuinely wants to learn.

My suggestion would be to work on your spare machine first.
You won't have to worry about blowing anything away and
it might evolve into a useful part of your network.  I'd also
start by installing from the CD as a stand-alone machine.
After you know your way around some, you can try to convert
it to a combined CPU/auth/file server and then look into
how you connect to it from other machines.

BLS

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Duke Normandin]

On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, John Floren wrote:

> At Thu, 13 Jan 2011 14:37:52 -0700 (MST),
> Duke Normandin wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, John Floren wrote:
> >
> > > I think you mentioned in another message that you have a headless box
> > > available; I recommend temporarily hooking that up to a monitor,
> > > keyboard, and mouse, then installing a standalone cpu/auth/file server
> > > on it. Once you're done, you can try using drawterm from Windows or
> > > Linux or whatever you have to test the configuration.
> >
> > I just checked - it's a 166Mhz P-I with 98M RAM and 4.5G HDD. Made a
> > good dedicated mail server. May not have enough gonads for a Plan 9
> > server though.
>
> That should do well enough for a basic Plan 9 cpu/auth/file server,
> although you may wish to forgo Venti given the small RAM and drive.

What is Venti again?

[snip]

> I've never bothered to install Plan 9 as a boot option on my desktops;
> I prefer to leave them booted into Linux and connect via drawterm,
> so as not to disturb my open applications.

The more I think about it, and the more I understand what Plan9 is,
the more I'm convinced that hanging a dedicated Plan9 box off my
router, and connecting to it from anywhere inside the subnet, is the
way to go.

> On my old laptop, I kept a Plan 9 terminal install because that was
> actually quite convenient, and I could boot using the server's root
> from most anywhere.

You must have had a dedicated server box as well, then?
--
Duke

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[erik quanstrom]

> > The Plan ( server would
> > have to have enough disk space to store its own stuff, plus the
> > workstation's file system? Could get dicey, if you've got a few
> > workstations net-booting, could it not?
>
> It can.  The clients all share a single copy of the common files,
> but each user will have his own files on the common server.
> But the full Plan9 installation is quite managable.  You can
> do quite a lot with only a few gig.

i think there's a fundamental misunderstanding here.  a plan 9
file server serves a *common* set of files.  so loosely speaking,
storage requirements scale with users, and not with the number
of systems attached.  one could boot dozens of cpu servers from
a fs with only 1gb of storage. the distribution takes only 300mb.

- erik

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[John Floren]

On 1/13/2011 7:42 PM, Duke Normandin wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, John Floren wrote:
>
>> At Thu, 13 Jan 2011 14:37:52 -0700 (MST),
>> Duke Normandin wrote:
>>> On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, John Floren wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think you mentioned in another message that you have a headless box
>>>> available; I recommend temporarily hooking that up to a monitor,
>>>> keyboard, and mouse, then installing a standalone cpu/auth/file server
>>>> on it. Once you're done, you can try using drawterm from Windows or
>>>> Linux or whatever you have to test the configuration.
>>> I just checked - it's a 166Mhz P-I with 98M RAM and 4.5G HDD. Made a
>>> good dedicated mail server. May not have enough gonads for a Plan 9
>>> server though.
>> That should do well enough for a basic Plan 9 cpu/auth/file server,
>> although you may wish to forgo Venti given the small RAM and drive.
> What is Venti again?
>
> [snip]
>

Venti is the archival storage for Plan 9. Basically, new files and
changes to files get written to the Fossil file system. If Venti exists,
those changes get written to Venti; Venti never deletes anything and
works on a rather cool block-coalescing system. I highly recommend
reading the paper.

On a system with a small disk, it's a good idea to go without Venti,
because of the space required. Fossil will then hold all your files,
meaning you don't get the daily snapshots, but you probably won't miss
those immediately--there's plenty of time to set up a system with a
bigger disk for Venti if you like Plan 9, or you could even add Venti
after the fact by sticking in another disk.

>> I've never bothered to install Plan 9 as a boot option on my desktops;
>> I prefer to leave them booted into Linux and connect via drawterm,
>> so as not to disturb my open applications.
> The more I think about it, and the more I understand what Plan9 is,
> the more I'm convinced that hanging a dedicated Plan9 box off my
> router, and connecting to it from anywhere inside the subnet, is the
> way to go.

That's really the best way, in my opinion.

>> On my old laptop, I kept a Plan 9 terminal install because that was
>> actually quite convenient, and I could boot using the server's root
>> from most anywhere.
> You must have had a dedicated server box as well, then?

I did until a few weeks ago, when I moved, yes.

John

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Duke Normandin]

On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, blstuart@bellsouth.net wrote:

[snip]

> > So the NIC in your Linux box must have to be PXE capable?
>
> It depends.  If you want to PXE boot the box directly and have
> it run the Plan9 kernel natively, then at some point, something
> will have to be PXE capable.  That could be the machine's BIOS
> or BIOS code on the NIC or even a boot loader loaded from a
> disk or CD or...

Got it ...

> On the other hand, for the case of virtualbox the PXE booting
> support is built into virtualbox itself.

ummm...

> > Truth be
> > told, I've never set up a net-booting system.
>
> Because Plan9 was designed from the ground up around a network
> organization, it does a good job of supporting net booting.  It's
> not hard to set up.
>
> > The Plan ( server would
> > have to have enough disk space to store its own stuff, plus the
> > workstation's file system? Could get dicey, if you've got a few
> > workstations net-booting, could it not?
>
> It can.  The clients all share a single copy of the common files,
> but each user will have his own files on the common server.
> But the full Plan9 installation is quite managable.  You can
> do quite a lot with only a few gig.

Yeah! It's only going to be me using the server. So it's not like I'm
going to hit it that hard. Can I run several Plan9 boxen, each
dedicated to a task - like mail; named; httpd, etc. All headless, but
just purring away ;)

[snip]

> > I'm in trouble already ...
>
> Rotfl...  You will be assimilated :)  Seriously though, the Plan9
> community is a good bunch and everyone is happy to help anyone
> who genuinely wants to learn.

I sense that already. I've got _a lot_ to learn; but I'm willing. BTW,
I'm just a 63yr old  programmer / networking hobbyist - all
self-taught. As I said in another post, my networking experience
started when I discovered FreeBSD - some 15 years ago. I've had some
nice LANs running - all before WIFI, and before routing appliances
were available. No probs. I enjoy it. Starting over with Plan9 is
going to be fun.

> My suggestion would be to work on your spare machine first.
> You won't have to worry about blowing anything away and
> it might evolve into a useful part of your network.  I'd also
> start by installing from the CD as a stand-alone machine.
> After you know your way around some, you can try to convert
> it to a combined CPU/auth/file server and then look into
> how you connect to it from other machines.

Sounds like a plan -- pun intended! Much obliged!
--
Duke

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[erik quanstrom]

> works on a rather cool block-coalescing system. I highly recommend
> reading the paper.
>
> On a system with a small disk, it's a good idea to go without Venti,
> because of the space required.

oh, the irony.

- erik

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Duke Normandin]

On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, John Floren wrote:

> On 1/13/2011 7:42 PM, Duke Normandin wrote:
>
> > What is Venti again?
>
> Venti is the archival storage for Plan 9. Basically, new files and
> changes to files get written to the Fossil file system. If Venti exists,
> those changes get written to Venti; Venti never deletes anything and
> works on a rather cool block-coalescing system. I highly recommend
> reading the paper.

I'll look for it. Sounds something like a RAID system to me. Or
`vinum' on FreebSD.

> On a system with a small disk, it's a good idea to go without Venti,
> because of the space required. Fossil will then hold all your files,
> meaning you don't get the daily snapshots, but you probably won't miss
> those immediately--there's plenty of time to set up a system with a
> bigger disk for Venti if you like Plan 9, or you could even add Venti
> after the fact by sticking in another disk.

What is the minimum HDD capacity required to run an Auth/cpu/fs server
with Venti support?
--
Duke

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Duke Normandin]

On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, erik quanstrom wrote:

> > > The Plan ( server would
> > > have to have enough disk space to store its own stuff, plus the
> > > workstation's file system? Could get dicey, if you've got a few
> > > workstations net-booting, could it not?
> >
> > It can.  The clients all share a single copy of the common files,
> > but each user will have his own files on the common server.
> > But the full Plan9 installation is quite managable.  You can
> > do quite a lot with only a few gig.
>
> i think there's a fundamental misunderstanding here.  a plan 9
> file server serves a *common* set of files.  so loosely speaking,
> storage requirements scale with users, and not with the number
> of systems attached.  one could boot dozens of cpu servers from
> a fs with only 1gb of storage. the distribution takes only 300mb.

I see!

--
Duke

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[John Floren]

On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 8:15 PM, Duke Normandin <dukeofperl@ml1.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, John Floren wrote:
>
>> On 1/13/2011 7:42 PM, Duke Normandin wrote:
>>
>> > What is Venti again?
>>
>> Venti is the archival storage for Plan 9. Basically, new files and
>> changes to files get written to the Fossil file system. If Venti exists,
>> those changes get written to Venti; Venti never deletes anything and
>> works on a rather cool block-coalescing system. I highly recommend
>> reading the paper.
>
> I'll look for it. Sounds something like a RAID system to me. Or
> `vinum' on FreebSD.
>
>> On a system with a small disk, it's a good idea to go without Venti,
>> because of the space required. Fossil will then hold all your files,
>> meaning you don't get the daily snapshots, but you probably won't miss
>> those immediately--there's plenty of time to set up a system with a
>> bigger disk for Venti if you like Plan 9, or you could even add Venti
>> after the fact by sticking in another disk.
>
> What is the minimum HDD capacity required to run an Auth/cpu/fs server
> with Venti support?

There's no hard and fast rule, really, but your Fossil partition needs
to be at least big enough to hold the full distribution, and Venti
should be big enough to hold everything you ever intend to put on the
system.

I wouldn't try it with less than a 20 GB disk, with say 2 GB for
Fossil and the rest for Venti; unless you start storing music and
video on there, that should give you plenty of room to work with.

John

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Duke Normandin]

On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, John Floren wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 8:15 PM, Duke Normandin <dukeofperl@ml1.net> wrote:
[snip]

> > What is the minimum HDD capacity required to run an Auth/cpu/fs server
> > with Venti support?
>
> There's no hard and fast rule, really, but your Fossil partition needs
> to be at least big enough to hold the full distribution, and Venti
> should be big enough to hold everything you ever intend to put on the
> system.

The Fossil partition being the partition where Plan9 will be running.
Venti should then be on another partition?

> I wouldn't try it with less than a 20 GB disk, with say 2 GB for
> Fossil and the rest for Venti; unless you start storing music and
> video on there, that should give you plenty of room to work with.

Ok! Can Venti be managed? As in, every so often, purge what isn't
needed?
--
Duke

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Jacob Todd]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1010 bytes --]

On Jan 13, 2011 11:33 PM, "Duke Normandin" <dukeofperl@ml1.net> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, John Floren wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 8:15 PM, Duke Normandin <dukeofperl@ml1.net>
wrote:
> [snip]
>
> > > What is the minimum HDD capacity required to run an Auth/cpu/fs server
> > > with Venti support?
> >
> > There's no hard and fast rule, really, but your Fossil partition needs
> > to be at least big enough to hold the full distribution, and Venti
> > should be big enough to hold everything you ever intend to put on the
> > system.
>
> The Fossil partition being the partition where Plan9 will be running.
> Venti should then be on another partition?
>
Yes.
> > I wouldn't try it with less than a 20 GB disk, with say 2 GB for
> > Fossil and the rest for Venti; unless you start storing music and
> > video on there, that should give you plenty of room to work with.
>
> Ok! Can Venti be managed? As in, every so often, purge what isn't
> needed?
No.
> --
> Duke
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1366 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Bakul Shah]

On Thu, 13 Jan 2011 21:31:00 MST Duke Normandin <dukeofperl@ml1.net>  wrote:
>
> > I wouldn't try it with less than a 20 GB disk, with say 2 GB for
> > Fossil and the rest for Venti; unless you start storing music and
> > video on there, that should give you plenty of room to work with.
>
> Ok! Can Venti be managed? As in, every so often, purge what isn't
> needed?

Not in the sense that you can purge specific files you don't
want and continue using the same venti. But you can do what a
copying garbage collector does -- it copies all the data
*reachable* from the data `roots' (a set of objects you know
you want). What is left behind is considered garbage and can
be recycled.  Similarly you can use venti tools to copy
backups for specific days to a separate venti archive and
periodically swap the roles of these two ventis.  Though I
don't know of anyone who does this. There is less of a need
to do so as well since only a single copy of a given data
block is stored regardless of how many file contain it.

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[erik quanstrom]

> Not in the sense that you can purge specific files you don't
> want and continue using the same venti. But you can do what a
> copying garbage collector does -- it copies all the data
> *reachable* from the data `roots' (a set of objects you know
> you want). What is left behind is considered garbage and can
> be recycled.

that's wrong.  there is no such function.

- erik

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Bakul Shah]

On Fri, 14 Jan 2011 12:54:04 EST erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>  wrote:
> > Not in the sense that you can purge specific files you don't
> > want and continue using the same venti. But you can do what a
> > copying garbage collector does -- it copies all the data
> > *reachable* from the data `roots' (a set of objects you know
> > you want). What is left behind is considered garbage and can
> > be recycled.
>
> that's wrong.  there is no such function.

Huh?  I am just described what copying garbage collection
does.  If you mean you can't do something similar with venti,
think about it!

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Federico G. Benavento]

> The Fossil partition being the partition where Plan9 will be running.
> Venti should then be on another partition?
>

Plan 9 partitions are (in the standard installation) subdivided,
9fat  - for the kernel
fossil - ...
swap - ...

plus "arenas" and "isect" if you chose to install venti
but come on.

when the talking takes more time than the doing, it's time
act.


--
Federico G. Benavento

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Charles Forsyth]

things shouldn't be written to venti by existing software
unless there is (or soon will be) a root
that refers to them, so i don't think the copying scheme
would work as things stand.

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Duke Normandin]

On Fri, 14 Jan 2011, Federico G. Benavento wrote:

> > The Fossil partition being the partition where Plan9 will be running.
> > Venti should then be on another partition?
> >
>
> Plan 9 partitions are (in the standard installation) subdivided,
> 9fat  - for the kernel
> fossil - ...
> swap - ...
>
> plus "arenas" and "isect" if you chose to install venti
> but come on.
>
> when the talking takes more time than the doing, it's time
> act.

Are you suggesting that "I shit or get off the pot!" ?
--
Duke

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[erik quanstrom]

> > > Not in the sense that you can purge specific files you don't
> > > want and continue using the same venti. But you can do what a
> > > copying garbage collector does -- it copies all the data
> > > *reachable* from the data `roots' (a set of objects you know
> > > you want). What is left behind is considered garbage and can
> > > be recycled.
> >
> > that's wrong.  there is no such function.
>
> Huh?  I am just described what copying garbage collection
> does.  If you mean you can't do something similar with venti,
> think about it!

what i understood the op to mean was that venti arenas are
garbage collectable.  this is not true.  arenas are write once,
so it follows they must be impossible to garbage collect.

venti is the block motel.  blocks check in, but they never check out.

- erik

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Duke Normandin]

On Fri, 14 Jan 2011, erik quanstrom wrote:

> > > > Not in the sense that you can purge specific files you don't
> > > > want and continue using the same venti. But you can do what a
> > > > copying garbage collector does -- it copies all the data
> > > > *reachable* from the data `roots' (a set of objects you know
> > > > you want). What is left behind is considered garbage and can
> > > > be recycled.
> > >
> > > that's wrong.  there is no such function.
> >
> > Huh?  I am just described what copying garbage collection
> > does.  If you mean you can't do something similar with venti,
> > think about it!
>
> what i understood the op to mean was that venti arenas are
> garbage collectable.  this is not true.  arenas are write once,
> so it follows they must be impossible to garbage collect.

Nah! Not me...

> venti is the block motel.  blocks check in, but they never check out.

Now that i realize what you're talking about - great analogy!

--
Duke

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Bakul Shah]

On Fri, 14 Jan 2011 14:13:48 EST erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>  wrote:
> > > > Not in the sense that you can purge specific files you don't
> > > > want and continue using the same venti. But you can do what a
> > > > copying garbage collector does -- it copies all the data
> > > > *reachable* from the data `roots' (a set of objects you know
> > > > you want). What is left behind is considered garbage and can
> > > > be recycled.
> > >
> > > that's wrong.  there is no such function.
> >
> > Huh?  I am just described what copying garbage collection
> > does.  If you mean you can't do something similar with venti,
> > think about it!
>
> what i understood the op to mean was that venti arenas are
> garbage collectable.  this is not true.  arenas are write once,
> so it follows they must be impossible to garbage collect.

You can't delete specific files from a given venti as we
know.

When Duke wrote "purge what isn't needed" I assumed he was
talking about a common use case, where one keeps frequent
backups of the recent past and less and less frequent backups
of points further back in time.  [For instance, at $work they
keep daily backups for a week, weeklies for a month,
monthlies for a quarter and so on.] This can be simulated
with venti by periodically running

    venti/copy $srcventi $dstventi $rootscore

using root score for each of the backups of interest.  Once
they are all copied, srcventi has nothing of interest that is
not already copied so now it can be "emptied out" and reused.
This is exactly like a copying GC.  Whether doing this makes
sense is a separate question.

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Charles Forsyth]

>Did I not allude to that when I used the word "daemon"?

not exactly. one important difference is that a file server in plan 9
"by definition" if you like interprets the 9P protocol.
there's no such guarantee for an arbitrary "daemon".
("That same daemon that hath gulled thee thus.")

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Charles Forsyth]

> Am I close?

a Plan 9 "file server" is just a program that responds to the 9P protocol described
in section 5 of the manual. (there is library support for writing a file server.)
a file server can provide a service other than conventional data storage: consider
rio, the plan 9 window system, and acme, a user interface for programmers.
some file servers are more conventional: 9660srv for access to storage in ISO9660 format,
and notably fossil and venti.

typically many file servers can run on one host, each providing a different
aspect of an application program's run-time environment, but some services might
(optionally) be given dedicated machines, such as venti and fossil.

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Duke Normandin]

On Fri, 14 Jan 2011, Charles Forsyth wrote:

> > Am I close?
>
> a Plan 9 "file server" is just a program that responds to the 9P
> protocol described in section 5 of the manual. (there is library
> support for writing a file server.)  a file server can provide a
> service other than conventional data storage: consider rio, the plan
> 9 window system, and acme, a user interface for programmers.  some
> file servers are more conventional: 9660srv for access to storage in
> ISO9660 format, and notably fossil and venti.
>
>  typically many file servers can run on one host, each providing a
> different aspect of an application program's run-time environment,
> but some services might (optionally) be given dedicated machines,
> such as venti and fossil.

Did I not allude to that when I used the word "daemon"?
--
Duke

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[erik quanstrom]

> Do you mean what is being referred to below as "worm HDD":
>
> http://www.storagesearch.com/view64.html

this instead: http://www.plasmon.com/archive_solutions/udodrives.html
or a bd+r.

for cost reasons, this isn't that practical anymore.

> I think that I'm also getting confused with the use of the term
> "server". I've just beens listening to Tanenbaum:

a "file server" is anything that takes the server side in a 9p conversation.
this could be a dedicated appliance (ken's file server), a device driver
(say, #æ, the aoe driver) or a user program.  there are no assumptions
about how, where or what transport protocol is used.

- erik

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Duke Normandin]

On Fri, 14 Jan 2011, erik quanstrom wrote:

> > > i don't use venti, i use the original file server, but this still holds
> > > true of any worm system.  in the 6 years i've had my worm, i've used
> > > 12gb.  yet the size of my worm went from 18gb to 1500gb.
> >
> > So the sub-partition fossil is mounts a WORM drive/device? or can this
> > sub-partition be another box on the network?
>
> i think there are two misunderstandings here
> 1.  "worm device" these days is a term that denotes how the device
> is used, not its actual properties.  real worm devices aren't used much
> anymore.  plasmon (or whatever they're called today) stll sells udo2, though

Do you mean what is being referred to below as "worm HDD":

http://www.storagesearch.com/view64.html

> 2.  you only need 1 file server accessing block storage.  everyone else
> accesses file storage from the file file server.  this usage is somewhat
> confusing since everything (device drivers, user level services) in plan
> 9 is a file server, but /the/ file server generally means primary, worm
> storage.  you need one of those.  other than the file server, only a tiny
> amount of disk is helpful for the storage of authentication keys in the
> "nvram" partition or dos file.  if the pc had actual usuable nvram, or
> if you don't mind typing keys on each boot, or you're booting as a
> terminal, no local storage is necessary.

I think that I'm also getting confused with the use of the term
"server". I've just beens listening to Tanenbaum:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bx3KuE7UjGA

talking about Minix3 and microkernels. Everything is in "user mode" -
except the kernel controls. So the Plan 9 "servers" you are referring
to, are daemons running in user space, and not a separate physical
box, like a machine running *only* "named", and being referred to as a
"nameserver"; or another running only "httpd", and being called a
"webserver". Am I close?
--
Duke

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[erik quanstrom]

> > i don't use venti, i use the original file server, but this still holds
> > true of any worm system.  in the 6 years i've had my worm, i've used
> > 12gb.  yet the size of my worm went from 18gb to 1500gb.
>
> So the sub-partition fossil is mounts a WORM drive/device? or can this
> sub-partition be another box on the network?

i think there are two misunderstandings here
1.  "worm device" these days is a term that denotes how the device
is used, not its actual properties.  real worm devices aren't used much
anymore.  plasmon (or whatever they're called today) stll sells udo2, though

2.  you only need 1 file server accessing block storage.  everyone else
accesses file storage from the file file server.  this usage is somewhat
confusing since everything (device drivers, user level services) in plan
9 is a file server, but /the/ file server generally means primary, worm
storage.  you need one of those.  other than the file server, only a tiny
amount of disk is helpful for the storage of authentication keys in the
"nvram" partition or dos file.  if the pc had actual usuable nvram, or
if you don't mind typing keys on each boot, or you're booting as a
terminal, no local storage is necessary.

- erik

Re: [9fans] Plan9 topology

[Duke Normandin]

On Fri, 14 Jan 2011, erik quanstrom wrote:

> > > The Fossil partition being the partition where Plan9 will be running.
> > > Venti should then be on another partition?
> > >
> > Yes.
>
> i don't think that this conveys the right meaning.  plan 9 is compatable with
> fdisk-style partitions, but typically subpartitions them with prep-style partitions.
> so, you need only one fdisk partition, which can be repartitioned with prep.
> clear?
>
> cf.	http://www.quanstro.net/magic/man2html/8/prep
> 	http://www.quanstro.net/magic/man2html/8/venti-fmt

Ok! I get the *sub* partition thing.

> > > > I wouldn't try it with less than a 20 GB disk, with say 2 GB for
> > > > Fossil and the rest for Venti; unless you start storing music and
> > > > video on there, that should give you plenty of room to work with.
> > >
> > > Ok! Can Venti be managed? As in, every so often, purge what isn't
> > > needed?
> > No.

[snip]

> i don't use venti, i use the original file server, but this still holds
> true of any worm system.  in the 6 years i've had my worm, i've used
> 12gb.  yet the size of my worm went from 18gb to 1500gb.

So the sub-partition fossil is mounts a WORM drive/device? or can this
sub-partition be another box on the network?

Plan 9 is sufficiently different from  mainstream OSes, that it would
be nice to have a diagram available of how all the parts fit together,
along with the different terminology (in some cases) being
used. Anything like that exist?
--
Duke

[9fans] Plan9 topology

[erik quanstrom]

> > The Fossil partition being the partition where Plan9 will be running.
> > Venti should then be on another partition?
> >
> Yes.

i don't think that this conveys the right meaning.  plan 9 is compatable with
fdisk-style partitions, but typically subpartitions them with prep-style partitions.
so, you need only one fdisk partition, which can be repartitioned with prep.
clear?

cf.	http://www.quanstro.net/magic/man2html/8/prep
	http://www.quanstro.net/magic/man2html/8/venti-fmt

> > > I wouldn't try it with less than a 20 GB disk, with say 2 GB for
> > > Fossil and the rest for Venti; unless you start storing music and
> > > video on there, that should give you plenty of room to work with.
> >
> > Ok! Can Venti be managed? As in, every so often, purge what isn't
> > needed?
> No.

the original observation (from /sys/doc/9.ps; sorry no web reference handy)
applying to the original fs, not venti.

	     Once a file is written to WORM, it cannot  be  removed,
	so  our  users never see ``please clean up your files'' mes-
	sages and there is no  df command.  We regard the WORM juke-
	box as an unlimited resource.  The only issue is how long it
	will take to fill.  Our WORM has served a community of about
	50  users  for five years and has absorbed daily dumps, con-
	suming a total of 65% of the storage  in  the  jukebox.   In
	that  time,  the  manufacturer  has improved the technology,
	doubling the capacity of the individual disks.  If  we  were
	to  upgrade  to the new media, we would have more free space
	than in the original empty jukebox.  Technology has  created
	storage faster than we can use it.

i don't use venti, i use the original file server, but this still holds
true of any worm system.  in the 6 years i've had my worm, i've used
12gb.  yet the size of my worm went from 18gb to 1500gb.

- erik