This paper compares two working network-based file servers, the Xerox Distributed File System (XDFS) implemented at the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center, and the Cambridge File Server (CFS) implemented at the Cambridge University Computer Laboratory. Both servers support concurrent random access to files using atomic transactions, both are connected to local area networks, and both have been in service long enough to enable us to draw lessons from them for future file servers.
We compare the servers in terms of design goals, implementation issues, performance, and their relative successes and failures, and discuss what we would do differently next time.
The full text of this article is premium content
No entries found
Log in to Read the Full Article
Please select one of the options below for access to premium content and features.
Create a Web Account
If you are already an ACM member, Communications subscriber, or Digital Library subscriber, please set up a web account to access premium content on this site.
Join the ACM
Become a member to take full advantage of ACM's outstanding computing information resources, networking opportunities, and other benefits.
Subscribe to Communications of the ACM Magazine
Get full access to 50+ years of CACM content and receive the print version of the magazine monthly.
Purchase the Article
Non-members can purchase this article or a copy of the magazine in which it appears.