On Wed, 23 Nov 2005, Dan Pritts wrote:
This can also be considered a disadvantage.  When using AFS, you are
forced to manage your storage the AFS way.  Files are effectively not
stored natively on the filesystem, and cannot be accessed via some other
method, and must be backed up via afs-specific methods.

It works pretty well, but as an NFSv4 presenter put it, NFS is a network
filesystem - with AFS you have to swallow the whale of all the other AFS
stuff.

I actively do not want files stored natively on a filesystem. I do not want to have to traverse an inode tree in order to do a vos release. Since AFS stores volumes already serialized, you can stream that file off the disk and across the network much faster than doing the equivalent of "tar -cf - . | nc destfileserver | tar -xf -" through a directory structure. Please don't suggest changing this if you don't understand how it affects the streaming vs. seeking performance of operations. The fact that AFS stores data in a serialized format in managable chunks is a *HUGE* win.
_______________________________________________
OpenAFS-info mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info

Reply via email to