On Thu, Aug 12, 1999 at 01:42:40PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The trouble is that it's a design decision that eliminates coda from being
> a viable network filesystem for a (potentially large) number of cases. As
> it stands, all clients must have a cache directory as large as the largest
>
e file back to the server?
-Rob H.
On Thu, 12 Aug 1999, Jan Harkes wrote:
> Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 10:34:02 -0400
> From: Jan Harkes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subj
On Thu, Aug 12, 1999 at 12:40:21PM +0200, Mitja Sarp wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 11, 1999 at 06:51:08PM -0400, Jan Harkes wrote:
>
> > Coda uses `whole file caching'. So your cache needs to be (at least) as
> > large as the 2GB file you are trying to work with. And, as you might
> > have noticed, the ca
On Wed, Aug 11, 1999 at 06:51:08PM -0400, Jan Harkes wrote:
> Coda uses `whole file caching'. So your cache needs to be (at least) as
> large as the 2GB file you are trying to work with. And, as you might
> have noticed, the cache-limit is a little `soft', and Coda only
> complains once every 30
On Wed, Aug 11, 1999 at 03:16:15PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi! I just set up a server (FreeBSD 3.1) and two clients (FreeBSD 2.2.8)
> that I was hoping to be able to use for large (>2GB files). However, my
> first problem is that when I try to work with files over the client cache
> size
