On Tue, Mar 05, 2019 at 10:25:23PM +0100, Måns Nilsson wrote: > Subject: [OpenAFS] About `dafileserver` vs `fileserver` differences (for > small cells) Date: Tue, Mar 05, 2019 at 10:05:25PM +0200 Quoting Ciprian > Dorin Craciun ([email protected]): > > Hello all! > > > > I understand from the documentation that the main difference between > > `dafileserver` and `fileserver` is the "on-demand-attach" of volumes. > > <snip> > > > I ask this also from the perspective of a small cell operator (for > > personal purposes), where attach-on-demand is not an issue, and in > > fact I think I would prefer all my volumes to be attached as early as > > possible. > > As I recall, the demand attach file server is a scalability option. Which in > practice means that if you need it, you know it. Me, I have a startup time > under one minute for my small cell of some 400 volumes over 1,5TiB data. This > using a small and old Supermicro machine with ZFS and FreeBSD.
My recollection was that the dafs was to be generally preferred in all cases. But I haven't interacted closely with those bits, so I'm just relaying hearsay; it would be good if someone closer to that work could chime in. -Ben _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
