(no title)
cherrycherry98 | 4 months ago
"Most Production Applications run from AFS"
"Most UNIX hosts are dataless AFS clients"
https://web.archive.org/web/20170709042700/http://www-conf.s...
cherrycherry98 | 4 months ago
"Most Production Applications run from AFS"
"Most UNIX hosts are dataless AFS clients"
https://web.archive.org/web/20170709042700/http://www-conf.s...
lmm|4 months ago
jaltman|4 months ago
https://www.usenix.org/legacy/publications/library/proceedin...
https://workshop.openafs.org/afsbpw08/talks/wed_1/OpenAFS_an...
hinkley|4 months ago
I looked up at one point whatever happened to AFS and it turns out that it has some Amdahl’s Law glass ceiling that ultimately limits the aggregate bandwidth to something around 1 GBps, which was fine when it was young but not fine when 100Mb Ethernet was ubiquitous and gigabit was obtainable with deep enough pockets. If adding more hardware can’t make the filesystem faster you’re dead.
I don’t know if or how openAFS has avoided these issues.
jaltman|4 months ago
AuriStor's RX and UBIK protocol and implementation improvements would be worthless if the application services couldn't scale. To accomplish this required converting each subsystem so it could operate with minimal lock contention.
This 2023 presentation by Simon Wilkinson describes the improvements that were made to AuriStor's RX implementation up to that point.
https://www.auristor.com/downloads/auristor-rx-hare-and-the-...
The RX tortoise is catching up with the TCP hare.
dotwaffle|4 months ago
As I understand it, it mitigated many of those issues, but is still very "90s" in operation.
I've been flirting with the idea of writing a replacement for years, about time I had a go at it!