> I was looking for the AFS version (Transarc I think) but could not > find where I can download it for free. The OpenAFS version seems to > be the most accessible one but as I understand from this list if the > Transarc version is now free why bother with the OpenAFS version. > Also I understood that the AFS version is more stable. am I correct? > Where can I get the free Transarc version of AFS?
The Transarc code is what became OpenAFS. IBM tossed the entire package over the wall to the open-source community in 2000, and no longer maintain it (disclaimer: SNA does a lot of work on this code). OpenAFS has made dramatic improvements in almost every area of that code, fixed dozens (if not hundreds) of bugs, and preserved backward compatibility with the Transarc package for support reasons. The Transarc code has severe and nasty bugs, and it's totally unsupported at this point. You REALLY don't want the Transarc code. Let that corpse rot, please. Use OpenAFS 1.4 or 1.5, if you're going to deploy AFS in a new context. > My thinking is that the merrits for running AFS go beyond Oracle. For > Linux guests under the same CEC roof, I can use hypersockets. I like > the idea of accessing AFS on Linux/z via Windows, AIX and SUN. I do > a lot of that today with NFS and SAMBA and if I can replace those with > AFS, that is a bonus. For those Oracle DBMS instances with a heavy > R/O access during the key on-line hours, I might be able to get away > with AFS as well. I think the effort is worthwhile. There are a number of people who do exactly that. Works great -- hipersockets or guest LANs work like a champ for this kind of stuff inside the box. > > > 2) if not, should I go for ocfs or gfs? pros and cons? > > If it's specifically Oracle you're dealing with, then ocfs is more > > likely to be supported and understood if you call in a problem to Oracle > > support. GFS probably has more users by virtue of being out there > > longer. > > My thinking is that for those heavy Oracle R/W we might need the OCFS > for the database file systems since Oracle support is important to us > and they better stand behind their OCFS solution. For us, it is only > a few instances that will need RAC for a heavy I/O R/W situation. > However, they are large files. Seems like a good plan to me. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
