Conclusion
The increasing dependence of users  on distributed file systems makes the availability  of these systems a matter of concern.The
two mechanisms of Coda that address this issue, server replication and disconnected operation,provide resiliency   in the face of many failures while minimally impacting performance .Although Coda is far from maturity,its design has been warmly accepted.
 
One can sit down at a Coda client and execute Unix applications without recompilation or relinking.Execution continues transparently when contact is lost with a server due to a crash or network failure.In the absence of failures, using coda client feels no different from using an AFS client.

Preliminary measurements with the Andrew benchmark shows that the degradation due to replication is relatively small.With one replica ,Coda performs about 5%worse than  with a non-replicated volume.With two and three replicas, it performs 9%  and 11% worse respectively.With three replicas, Coda performs 28% worse than a local unix file system. It should be emphasized that these measurements are from an untuned prototype, and significant improvements are been made as Coda is refined.