Derrick J Brashear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > yes, we should consider having the vldb return port information for > fileservers, which would make this easier: you'd only need separate > vldbs.
Can the current fileserver code cope with two copies of itself (belonging to different cells) running on a single machine? If you compiled two copies of OpenAFS with different --prefix= flasgs, would there be any problems remaining (other than fighting over the same UDP port)? I've always been a bit troubled by "ThisCell"... it is a nice simplifying assumption to insist that each server machine belongs to exactly once cell, but lifting that restriction has advantages. How deeply into the AFS code is this assumption ingrained? Do on-disk volumes "know" what cell they belong to (is it written in a file somewhere inside /viceX/?) - s -- PGP/GPG: 5C9F F366 C9CF 2145 E770 B1B8 EFB1 462D A146 C380 _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list OpenAFS-info@openafs.org https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info