[OpenAFS] Evaluating AFS for in house use, RFCs...

Mitch Collinsworth mitch@ccmr.cornell.edu
Fri, 3 Feb 2006 10:39:30 -0500 (EST)

On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, Jeffrey Altman wrote:

> People talk about how bad the performance of AFS is.  It is nowhere near
> as bad as the performance of SMB.

Do you have numbers to back this up?  I don't but having them would be
helpful.  Probably to many more sites than just ours.  The last time
I remember hearing numbers (a while ago now) it was the other way around.

> You want your AFS client close to the
> user because that way the AFS Cache Manager will actually benefit your
> user.  If the only contact with AFS is via Samba, you also have the
> problem that clients are unable to manage ACLs, check quota, create
> mount points, etc. since SMB/CIFS does not support those operations.

The vast majority of users don't care about any of these operations.
They just want to save data and retrieve it.  Or maybe it's save it
and forget about it.  While installing the client might be a good
thing, the user isn't going to buy it based on this logic.  If we had
numbers to show how much faster it is, that they would buy.