On Mon, Jun 24, 2002 at 12:10:29PM +0200, Jimmy Engelbrecht wrote: > FBO <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Hi AFS-Fans, > > Hi! > > > Does anyone have experience with "alternative AFS-Implementations" > > (different from OpenAFS)? > > What about ARLA or MS-AFS? What are the differences, advantages, > > disadvantages, critical bugs,... > > We have been running running arla in production over 2 years. > We have now about 140 Linux-boxes running arla. > > * arla does not die when you do "ls -al /afs" > > * arla never crashes the kernel, if it crashes only the userdeamon dies, > which can just be restarted. Very interesting. I do have 2 PCs that are unable to do a clean shutdown (without a crash) when openafs was started before. 3 of my other PCs do not have a problem with that (same kernel, same distri,...).
> * we have expierienced better performance on some operations with arla on > Linux 2.4 than OpenAFS 1.2.2 That sounds interesting, too. Which operations? > * arla's utilities (for ex. vos) does not provide all features you want, we > use sometimes the openafs-utilities (which are compatible) on hosts that > run arla. > > * arla does not crash or hang the mashine when you disconnect it from the > network. I do not recommend openafs on laptops. > > * arla does not provide a userful filerserver-environment yet. We run > OpenAFS. > > * arla 0.35 does caching on whole files. > > I do not recommend arla for Solaris yet. On Solaris we run Openafs. > > Arla works fine on *BSD, Linux, and almost fine on Tru64. Is there a WinNT-Client, too? > > Performance and stability ist most interesting. > > What are the best arguments for and ( I hope they don't exist :-) ) > > against OpenAFS? > > Compared to what ? NFS ? I meant "compared to other AFS-implementations"... :-) _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
