[OpenAFS] Is OpenAFS appropriate?

[Stephen Bosch]

Jason C. Wells wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Jan 2004, Stephen Bosch wrote:
> 
> 
>>Hi, everybody:
> 
> 
> To answer your last question first, AFS is easy to administer on a day to
> day basis.  Once it's up, it works.
> 
> To talk about some of the other issues you addressed, AFS is the only
> system that provides certain features.  For me it was Kerberos, redundancy
> and backup all in one package.  And remember AFS is a _distributed_ file
> system and not merely a networked file system.  The distinction is
> significant.

Obviously I prefer having a distributed file system, it's what got me 
excited about AFS in the first place, but in lieu of that, we have to 
have at least a network file system.

> One can look at something supposedly simple to administer such as SMB, but
> it doesn't provide the feature set.  Same with NFS.

Agreed.

> If you learned how to implement AFS, you learned just about everything one
> needs to learn about doing system administration.  That is a ton of
> knowledge so of course it's a steep learning curve.

I "learned" it, but I don't know that I've learned it, if you catch my 
meaning. There are probably a few more lessons to come.

Stephen Bosch