On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 01:07:22PM -0500, Andrew Deason wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Jul 2014 15:19:01 +0200
> <u-codalist-z149_at_aetey.se> wrote:
> 
> > - mountpoints are to contain a list of serverids (representing the VSG)
> >   and a volume id, iow no longer involving the Coda servers in the
> >   resolution of a mount point (this implies a possibility to create
> >   inconsistent mount points, which otoh doesn't look too dangerous)
> 
> I'm a bit confused by this one. Would this mean you cannot move volumes
> to different servers? Since, if you changed what serverid(s) a volume
> was on, you'd need to go through every mountpoint referencing it to
> change the list of server ids.
> 
> (I have very little familiarity with Coda and I'm not spending a
> terribly large amount of time reading this, so sorry if this was
> addressed elsewhere or is otherwise a dumb question :)

There are only dumb answers, like the following distraction :)

So what do we need to get a DFS-biz (distributed filesystem business development)
organization/group/mail-list/cabal put together?

We have this group of people who have been working on this problem for well
over 20 years, and the marketing guys come along and sell an inferior product
(dropbox, gmail, skydrive, ubuntu one, etc etc) and get all the money. 

I think it's going to take open-source hardware to actually make good 
distributed filesystems the norm, because I think that's the only way to 
properly vertically integrate everything together.

So that leaves AFS and now apparently Coda that actually have a long-term
history of people putting files in and actually being able to get them back.

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Troy Benjegerdes                 'da hozer'                  hozer_at_hozed.org
7 elements      earth::water::air::fire::mind::spirit::soul        grid.coop

      Never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel,
         nor try buy a hacker who makes money by the megahash