[Infrastructures] Coda, to do or not to do?

[Steve Traugott]

--bg08WKrSYDhXBjb5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Thanks for the answers Ivan.  This provides me with a pretty good sense
of where Coda is right now.

There was just now a short rant about Coda on the OpenAFS list a few
days ago as well, in case anyone's interested.  (Derrick, Derek, and
Esther joined in -- any SAGE folks should be able to imagine how that
went...)  ;-)

Steve

On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 12:43:24PM +0100, Ivan Popov wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 12:51:30AM -0800, Steve Traugott wrote:
>=20
> > Since you have current experience with Coda, I have a question for you:
> > which would you recommend today for a few hundred terabytes of both R/O
> > and R/W data for a 1000-seat trading floor -- AFS or Coda? =20
>=20
> It really depends on the kind of things you do with the data.
> To the best of my knowledge nobody yet used Coda for terabytes of data
> in a single realm, so AFS would be a safer bet.
>=20
> Coda has its unique features and its limitations. It works well
> when you use it for "right things". The right things do not probably
> (yet?) include trading floor setups.
>=20
> > Has Coda reached the point where you would trust it that far yet?  Why
>=20
> Most probably I wouldn't. I am not in that business, so it is hard to say.
> It might be I'd pay someone a cost of couple of minutes outage, to work
> on Coda and make sure I can trust my life to Coda for the next project
> 6 months later.
>=20
> Coda is namely incredibly good at dealing with network or server outages.
>=20
> Coda still has some limitations inherited from the early design stages,
> like max directory size (about 256K) and max number of files
> per server - about 1 million. It translates to 16 GB with 16KB-files
> and to 100 TB with 100MB-files (a realm may consist of dozens of servers).
> Both limitations are going to be fixed at some moment,
> but still they are there.
>=20
> > or why not?  If not, what's the farthest you would push it right now?
>=20
> I am using Coda as a replicated storage for tens of gigabytes of data
> and to host home directories for loyal users without critical data.
> No problems whatsoever. So you may assume it works thus far.
>=20
> People were trying to use Coda for web clusters, I do not know if there is
> any put into production. In most cases, Coda is not adequate for clusters,
> where all participants are to be trusted anyway and low latency with big =
files
> is a vital requirement.
>=20
> Hope the above gives some idea of what Coda is and what it is not.
>=20
> Best regards,
> --
> Ivan
>=20

--=20
Stephen G. Traugott  (KG6HDQ)
UNIX/Linux Infrastructure Architect, TerraLuna LLC
stevegt@TerraLuna.Org=20
http://www.stevegt.com -- http://Infrastructures.Org

--bg08WKrSYDhXBjb5
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCO47A8rKIxO1Fc9MRAhHDAKCgybA81ar39CY6gxNTC8I2cn1JkQCgnQO+
5hRi0gGiD0BHjgHkZACT1MU=
=hMGf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--bg08WKrSYDhXBjb5--