Paul,
My gut tells me that you won't have much trouble mounting 50K file
systems with ZFS. But who knows until you try. My questions for you is
can you lab this out? you could build a commodity server with a ZFS
pool on it. Heck it could be a small pool, one disk, and then put your
50K file systems on that. Reboot, thrash about, and see what happens.
Then the next step would be fooling with the client side of things. If
you can get time on a chunk of your existing client systems, see if you
can mount a bunch of those 50K file systems smoothly. Off hours,
perhaps. The next problem of course, and to be honest, this may be the
killer, test with your name service in the loop. You may need netgroups
to delineate permissions for your shares, and to define your automounter
maps. In my personal experience, with about 1-2% as many shares and
mount points as you need, the name servers gets stressed out really
fast. There have been some issues around LDAP port reuse in Solaris
that can cause some headaches as well, but there are patches to help you
too. Also, as you may know, Linux doesn't play well with hundreds of
concurrent mount operations. If you use Linux NFS clients in your
environment, be sure to lab that out as well.
At any rate, you may indeed be an outlier with so many file systems and
NFS mounts, but I imagine many of us are waiting on the edge of our
seats to see if you can make it all work. Speaking for my self, I would
love to know how ZFS, NFS and LDAP scale up to such a huge system.
Regards,
Jon
Paul B. Henson wrote:
On Fri, 21 Sep 2007, James F. Hranicky wrote:
It just seems rather involved, and relatively inefficient to continuously
be mounting/unmounting stuff all the time. One of the applications to be
deployed against the filesystem will be web service, I can't really
envision a web server with tens of thousands of NFS mounts coming and
going, seems like a lot of overhead.
Well, that's why ZFS wouldn't work for us :-( .
Although, I'm just saying that from my gut -- does anyone have any actual
experience with automounting thousands of file systems? Does it work? Is it
horribly inefficient? Poor performance? Resource intensive?
Makes sense -- in that case you would be looking at multiple SMB servers,
though.
Yes, with again the resultant problem of worrying about where a user's
files are when they want to access them :(.
--
- _____/ _____/ / - Jonathan Loran - -
- / / / IT Manager -
- _____ / _____ / / Space Sciences Laboratory, UC Berkeley
- / / / (510) 643-5146 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- ______/ ______/ ______/ AST:7731^29u18e3
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
