Configuration
Netbsd4
heimdal1.1
arla
Openafs 1.4.5 via pkgsrc
replicated root.afs root.cell RO
1000 user per server
10 servers for fileserver.
2 servers for vlserver and ptserver
Our users have been experiencing some major lag accessing afs .
It all began when we had an hardware problem with
On Wed, 18 Mar 2009, Abdelkader El mastour wrote:
Configuration
Netbsd4
heimdal1.1
arla
You have Arla clients?
Openafs 1.4.5 via pkgsrc
replicated root.afs root.cell RO
1000 user per server
10 servers for fileserver.
2 servers for vlserver and ptserver
This is not good. I've recently
On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Derrick Brashear sha...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 5:35 AM, Abdelkader El mastour
a.elmast...@gmail.com wrote:
Configuration
Netbsd4
heimdal1.1
arla
Openafs 1.4.5 via pkgsrc
replicated root.afs root.cell RO
1000 user per server
On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Pesce, Nicholas npe...@qualcomm.comwrote:
We just experienced significant lag issues at our AFS site for vos exam and
vos release issues. This seemed to be caused by a bug with Ubik callbacks
(version 1.4.7) . One of our database servers was restarted then
On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 1:49 PM, Rich Sudlow r...@nd.edu wrote:
Kevin Coffman wrote:
I have inherited a tape library and am looking to automate backups.
(We're still using regular butc backups.)
I know there is/was a script called stbutc that was once available
from grand.central.org. Is
I agree with Abdelkader and would recommend having at least 3 database
servers. You could be walking on very thin ice with just 2.
Whats the reason for this ?
I'm no ubik engineer, but as far as I understand it, the protocol was not
designed for even numbers of participating servers. For best
I'm no ubik engineer, but as far as I understand it, the protocol was not
designed for even numbers of participating servers. For best results, three
or five servers seem to be optimum.
There is a lot of misinformation about Ubik out there; the voting
protocol is actually not complicated, it's
On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 9:56 PM, Ken Hornstein k...@cmf.nrl.navy.mil wrote:
I'm no ubik engineer, but as far as I understand it, the protocol was not
designed for even numbers of participating servers. For best results, three
or five servers seem to be optimum.
There is a lot of misinformation
