Rune:

Thank you for your reply. I appreciate your insights.

Regarding your specific points:

> Coda should suit well, if you only serve static files 
> from there.

I am going to keep the databases on the local disks of
the db servers.  I read the article about Coda not being
well suited for such files.

> You do not need multiple replication of Coda servers,
> 2 or 3 is enough, as the clients cache the files being
> used and survive even if all servers would disappear.

>From that, I think I should run a Coda server on 
each of my database servers and run a Coda client 
on each of the web servers.

> Availability of SCM does not influence the availability
> of the file service

That is good.

>> 1. Does the SCM need to run on a Coda server?
> no
> The usual choice
> is though to run both services (file and authentication) on each of the
> hosts designated as "Coda servers". The db-update service is normally
> run on one of those machines

That supports the idea of setting up my db servers as Coda servers
and the web servers as Coda clients.  It does seem more normal that
way.  Thanks for the tip.

>> 2. Is it possible to run more than one SCM in a
>>   master/slave setup? 
> Coda servers exchange the internal databases in a master/slave fashion
> and SCM means "the master".

Is there a way to have automatic failover if the master fails?

Thanks,
	Neil

--
Neil Aggarwal, (281)846-8957, http://UnmeteredVPS.net/centos
Virtual private server with CentOS 5.5 preinstalled
Unmetered bandwidth = no overage charges