Coda File System

Is Coda Right For Me.

From: Kevin Atkinson <>
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 13:27:54 -0400 (EDT)
I am strongly thinking about using Coda as a solution to my current
Ad-Hoc system of storing files on which ever computer I happen to be
working on and sharing selected directory via SMB of NFS.  But before
I start I would like to know if Coda is up to the task.

My Setup

100 MB Ethernet Network
Linux/Windows 98 Desktop, 100 gig, PIII 500
Linux/Windows 98 Laptop, P 200 MMX
Windows XP (Family), P4
Linux Server, 25 gig, P 166 MMX

The Linux Server machine will be the main Coda server.  If things work
out it will get a larger hard drive.

Desktop machine is mostly booted in Linux but occasionally in
Windows.  When in Linux it will act as a Coda Server and Client.  When
it Windows it will act as a Client.  When used as a server its primary
purpose will be for backup replication.

The laptop will act purely as a coda client.

If possible I would like the Linux and Win32 coda client to share the
same cache.  This is epically important on the laptop as disk space
is tight (I only have 4 gigs) and because when I am disconnected I
would like access to the same set of files in both Windows and Linux.

The family computer will also act purely as a coda client.  The main
purpose use of this computer is for multimedia work.

The primary reason for wanting to use CODA is that I do a lot of
multimedia work which involves both my Desktop machine and the Family
machine.  Typically I will capture the the video on my Desktop
machine.  Then copy the files which vary anywhere from (100 - 2000 MB)
over the network to my family machine and then process the files
convert them to MPEG and move the final result back to my Desktop.
I will then make an additional copy of the final results on the Linux
Server for backup purposes. The files are transfered via SMB and NFS.

I would like to use Coda so that I can avoid the manual copying of
files around.  It is infeasible to simply store the files on the Linux
Server and use process them over the network since all file operations
will involve network traffic which is simply not fast enough for
multimedia purposes.  I am hoping that Coda will cut down on network
traffic significantly in order to make this feasible.  In particular I
am hoping that read and to a file will be almost as fast as accessing
a local copy once the file is in the cache.  I am also hoping that
writing to a new file will be almost as fast as writing to the local
hard drive so that I can capture directly to the coda server.  I
assume code were store the file locally in the cache and will write
the changes back to the server when the file is closed to provide
high write throughput.

Even if store everything on the Linux Server I still have to worry
about making manual backup copies.  Using my Desktop machine as a coda
server for backup purposes will solve this problem nicely.

If coda works out I will also be storing a significant amount of other
files (non-multimedia) currently on my Desktop on the Linux server so
that I can seemly access the files on my Notebook without a lot of
fuss.  Currently I have to remember to copy the files I need access to
on my notebook.  Simply sharing the files via NFS or SMB on my desktop
won't work because often I will be using Windows on my Desktop machine
and will need access to files on my Linux partitions from my Notebook.

So, I would like to know if CODA is up to the task?  

In particular I would like to know how stable coda is on Win32 and how
well it will deal with the huge multimedia files.  

I would also like to know if my Linux Server is powerful enough to act
as a CODA server.

Consistent read and write throughput is also important, especially
when capturing video.  I expect read throughput to be consistent for
reading large files which are not yet in the cache so the playback
will be smooth.  

I hope I explained everything sufficiently.  If not let me know and I
will try to clarify.

Received on 2002-10-15 13:29:44