On Tue, 2004-01-27 at 16:18, Jan Harkes wrote: > On Tue, Jan 27, 2004 at 03:25:12PM +0100, Mark Phalan wrote: > > I guess I was just thinking it would be a nice optimization for those > > cases where clients are strongly connected and trying to access small > > parts of huge files (bigger than cache). Its ability to operate in a > > If the clients are strongly connected, and people only want to access > small parts of huge files, the obvious solution would be to use OpenAFS > (or maybe Arla, if they are still active). > > Jan
That's perfect. So I can use OpenAFS for movies, and coda for mp3s. That way my server won't be bogged down unless it's serving a movie. An in-car xbox mp3 player and any laptops etc can play mp3s from their local coda caches, my favorite tunes always available whether I'm connected to the home network or not.... -- Adam Manock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
