From owner-freebsd-isp Tue Jul 27 6:43:21 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Received: from tardis.patho.gen.nz (tardis.patho.gen.nz [203.97.2.226]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4925A14FD9 for ; Tue, 27 Jul 1999 06:43:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jabley@tardis.patho.gen.nz) Received: (from jabley@localhost) by tardis.patho.gen.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3) id BAA11129 for freebsd-isp@freebsd.org; Wed, 28 Jul 1999 01:43:05 +1200 (NZST) Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 01:43:00 +1200 From: Joe Abley To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: coda Message-ID: <19990728014259.A6383@patho.gen.nz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.5i X-Files: the Truth is Out There Sender: owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hi, I have a requirement for a cheap, yet highly reliable back-end network filesystem for a project that's coming up. In previous lives I have dealt with such requirements using NetApp filer clusters with FCAL-attached disk; however, this is Not A Cheap Solution (although it does have many other advantages). However, I have just read through the coda docs, and have started to drool :) I have a picture in my mind of various back-end machines with (say) small piles of SCSI disks in them all contributing to a coda filesystem, arranged with volume replication such that any individual machine can be pulled from the array without noticably hurting the clients. Is anybody using coda in a real world environment? With FreeBSD 3.2 clients and servers? How would you rate the performance? As a benchmark only, would you ever (in your wildest dreams :) consider running a production news server with its article store on a coda filesystem? How about something with way more reads than writes, like a farm of web servers? How stable is coda in it's current form in -STABLE? Joe To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message