FBO <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hi AFS-Fans,
Hi! > Does anyone have experience with "alternative AFS-Implementations" > (different from OpenAFS)? > What about ARLA or MS-AFS? What are the differences, advantages, > disadvantages, critical bugs,... We have been running running arla in production over 2 years. We have now about 140 Linux-boxes running arla. * arla does not die when you do "ls -al /afs" * arla never crashes the kernel, if it crashes only the userdeamon dies, which can just be restarted. * we have expierienced better performance on some operations with arla on Linux 2.4 than OpenAFS 1.2.2 * arla's utilities (for ex. vos) does not provide all features you want, we use sometimes the openafs-utilities (which are compatible) on hosts that run arla. * arla does not crash or hang the mashine when you disconnect it from the network. I do not recommend openafs on laptops. * arla does not provide a userful filerserver-environment yet. We run OpenAFS. * arla 0.35 does caching on whole files. I do not recommend arla for Solaris yet. On Solaris we run Openafs. Arla works fine on *BSD, Linux, and almost fine on Tru64. > Performance and stability ist most interesting. > What are the best arguments for and ( I hope they don't exist :-) ) > against OpenAFS? Compared to what ? NFS ? > Are there any Documents available, comparing different AFS-Implementations? i dont think so. /Jimmy _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info