Ivan,

Thanks for the response, when do you think coda will
be able to handle the larger server installations?

Would you recommend us moving to coda, or just keep
to NFS until these other issues are addressed?


Cheers
Dave



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ivan Popov" <pin_at_math.chalmers.se>
To: "David Shirley" <dave_at_cs.curtin.edu.au>
Cc: <codalist_at_coda.cs.cmu.edu>
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 4:29 PM
Subject: Re: Question regarding amount of VM needed!


> Hello David,
> 
> On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, David Shirley wrote:
> 
> > We are considering switching from NFS to Coda, in our
> > current setup we have a 270 Gig RAID 5 paritition.
> >
> > My quesiton is do we really need to have 4% RVM partition?
> > Also must this be on a seperate disk or can it be taken out
> > of the 270 but made another partition?
> 
> sorry to probably disappoint you, but you would have to run about 10
> server processes to cover that amount of data, because one server process
> is currently limited to about 1G rvm.
> 
> > Also the doco says we need to have the same about of Virtual
> > Memory as my RVM size, for a 270 gig data partition the
> > RVM will be 10 gig..
> 
> Yes, that's right. Unfortunately Coda cannot yet manage that amount at
> once, so you'd have to have 10 partitions 1G each (and 10 rvm-log
> partitions, these are small, but have to be fast, so it is better to not
> have them in files).
> 
> You would need also some policy to create volumes on different
> server[processe]s, so that no one of the server processes gets
> too many files == too much metadata to manage.
> 
> Hope it helps,
> --
> Ivan
> 
>