[OpenAFS] OpenAFS VS Coda

[Sophana Kok]

Coda has more features than afs.
Mainly, it is designed for use though the internet with disconnected 
operation, bandwidth adaptation.
One interesting feature I found in the dfsprotocols.pdf is that it 
supports RW volume replication (write all, read once). I don't know if 
performance is there.

To conclude, most features are for high availability.

For a compute cluster, I'm not sure if all these features are useful. 
Also, I think that the coda comunity is less active than afs.
The only time I tried coda, there was a bug that was known. It surely 
has been corrected since, but I didn't try.

dom.toretto@pandora.be wrote:

>Hello everyone,
>
>THX for all the help with setting up my OpenAFS cell! As I already told you, I'm doing some research on clustering filesystems (OpenAFS and Coda in particular), and I want to know if there is someone here who has experience with both of them.
>If so, can you tell me wath the differences are and make a comparison of both?
>
>THX in advance! 
>
>Greetz ;-)
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>OpenAFS-info mailing list
>OpenAFS-info@openafs.org
>https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
>
>  
>