[Gluster-devel] Has anyone... pure nfs replacement
Einar Gautun
einar.gautun at statkart.no
Thu May 22 17:19:28 UTC 2008
I've been running this solution for more than a year, because NFS in
effect stopped (33Kbit/s and a horrific load on the server) when copying
big file trees.
A quick test right now shows kernel compile on
gluserfs:
real 17m35.994s
user 4m8.740s
sys 0m47.560s
locally (I don't run nfs anymore):
real 4m42.005s
user 3m51.270s
sys 0m31.200s
on GigEth.
The speed on doing ls -l is near to local disk speed. The load are very
smal. I'm using 3ware sata controllers.
Regards
Einar
On Wed, 2008-05-07 at 09:37 -0700, Brandon Lamb wrote:
> Has anyone replaced nfs with glusterfs using no afr/unify, just a pure
> nfs replacement?
>
> I ask this as a way to take a baby step into using glusterfs, first
> going from nfs to glusterfs, then when these quirks that are going
> around in recent threads about afr are worked out switching to
> replication.
>
> BUT, original most important question, anyone seen that glusterfs is
> faster, better than using an nfs server?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-devel mailing list
> Gluster-devel at nongnu.org
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
--
Einar Gautun einar.gautun at statkart.no
Statens kartverk | Norwegian Mapping Authority
3507 Hønefoss | NO-3507 Hønefoss, Norway
Ph +47 32118372 Fax +47 32118101 Mob +47 92692662
More information about the Gluster-devel
mailing list