Henning Brauer wrote:
* Joachim Schipper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-04-20 14:49]:
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 12:36:29PM +0200, Henning Brauer wrote:
* Joachim Schipper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-04-20 00:36]:
On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 10:51:56PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
I don't think NFS/AFS is that good an idea; you'll need very beefy
fileservers and a fast network.
NFS may actually be useful; if you really need the files in one
directory space for management/updates that's a way to do it (i.e.
mount all the various storage servers by NFS on a management
station/ftp server/whatever).
Something like that might be a very good idea, yes. Just don't try to
serve everything directly off NFS.
there is nothing wrong with serving directly from NFS.
Really? You have a lot more experience in this area, so I will defer to
you if you are sure, but it seems to me that in the sort of system I
explicitly assumed (something like a web farm), serving everything off
NFS would involve either very expensive hardware or be rather slow.
no. cache works. reads are no problem whatsoever in this kind of setup
(well. I am sure you can make that a problem with many frontend servers
and lots to read. obviously. but for any sane number of frontends,
should not)
OK, then how well CARP works on NFS for backup mount in case something
goes wrong with the main NFS server source? Is it efficient, possible
and mount itself again? Delay? What do you consider a sane number of
front ends, 10, less, more? Cache, you mean cache on the source NFS, or
cache on the client NFS? Sorry, look like I have more questions then
answers as I skip NFS a few years ago because of the bottle neck on the
NFS transfer. Write was bad, read OK, but not huge. May well be
different now, I would be happy with decent read, but what can be
excepted. The archive is not to nice on the subject I have to say.
Always looks like a bottle neck on the NFS side. If small site, or low
traffic, yes that's great, but what can one expect to reach the limits
here? Any ideas?
May be it's time for me to revisit this yet again, but never been very
succesful with high traffic.
Many thanks
Daniel
