Xref: utzoo comp.unix.questions:6246 comp.unix.wizards:7361 comp.arch:4075
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!pyramid!weitek!setting!robert
From: robert@setting.weitek.UUCP (Robert Plamondon)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.wizards,comp.arch
Subject: Re: RFS vs. NFS
Message-ID: <649@setting.weitek.UUCP>
Date: 25 Mar 88 18:16:30 GMT
References: <326@ivory.SanDiego.NCR.COM> <7765@apple.Apple.Com> <7533@brl-smoke.ARPA> <4112@vdsvax.steinmetz.ge.com> <4496@megaron.arizona.edu>
Organization: WEITEK Corporation, Sunnyvale CA
Lines: 20

In article <4496@megaron.arizona.edu> lm@megaron.arizona.edu.UUCP (Larry McVoy) writes:
>And a further comment on stateless file systems:  when working on the
>Apollos, it was rarely, if ever the sort of disaster envisioned by the
>stateless advocates when a node crashed.  I dunno how, but somehow or
>other things seemed to work ok.  You noticed that certain trees of
>files were "gone".  That's all.  Nothing worse.

To me, NOTHING is worse than losing files due to a server crash!  The
server can burst into flames and slag down on the computer floor for
all I care, just so long as somewhere in the smoking mass of
ex-hardware is a disk drive that still has my work on it.  Hardware
comes and goes, operating systems can be reloaded, but the user's work is
all-important!

	-- Robert
-- 

    Robert Plamondon
    UUCP: {pyramid,cae780}!weitek!robert
    ARPA: "pyramid!weitek!robert"@decwrl.dec.COM
    "The paper IS the product"