Hi folks, Here's a hypothetical question regarding the replication of AFS volumes:
In an organization where it is only necessary for an administrator to either give users read-write access to volumes, or no access at all, what would be the advantage of creating any read-only replicas, beyond those for the standard volumes at the root of the AFS namespace?
This subject is confusing to me, because I've learned that once a client has encountered a read-write mount point, it becomes biased towards accessing only read-write replicas beyond it, ignoring any and all perfectly usable read-only volumes that may be available.
Of course, read-only replicas with hourly releases can be used as a safety net, allowing data to be more quickly recovered in the event of a failure, but if that's viewed as an unnecessary measure, then what other reasons reasons might there be for replicating any volumes?
Thanks, Jaap _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list OpenAFS-info@openafs.org https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
