[Gluster-devel] Can I bring a development idea to Dev's attention?

[Ed W]

  Any news? Wed latest seems to have been and gone?

I think some kind of optimistic locking is the kind of thing which 
pushes Gluster into the high performance bracket (without needing 40GB 
cards, which when you think about it kind of ends up creating just one 
big NUMA machine rather than a cluster setup)

If the kernel NLM can do this satisfactorily then seems like things get 
even better?

Cheers

Ed W

On 26/09/2010 03:02, Craig Carl wrote:
> Ed -
>     I'll follow up on your request with engineering and professional 
> services, can we get back to you Wednesday latest?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Craig
>
> --
> Craig Carl
> Sales Engineer; Gluster, Inc.
> Cell - (408) 829-9953 <about:blank> (California, USA)
> Office - (408) 770-1884 <about:blank>
> Gtalk - craig.carl at gmail.com
> Twitter - @gluster
> Installing Gluster Storage Platform, the movie! 
> <http://www.youtube.com/user/GlusterStorage>
> http://rackerhacker.com/2010/08/11/one-month-with-glusterfs-in-production/
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From: *"Ed W" <lists at wildgooses.com>
> *To: *gluster-devel at nongnu.org
> *Sent: *Saturday, September 25, 2010 5:35:21 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [Gluster-devel] Can I bring a development idea to Dev's 
> attention?
>
>   Does someone from Gluster like to contact me with a "reasonable" offer
> for sponsoring some kind of "optimistic cache" feature, with a specific
> view to optimising the NUFA server side replication architecture?
>
> I would specifically like to optimise the case that you have a flat
> namespace on the server (master/master filesharing), but you optimise
> the applications in such a way that the applications running on each
> brick (NUFA) only touch a subset of all files (in general).  eg a
> mailserver with a flat filesystem, but users are proxied so that they
> generally touch only a specific server, or a webserver with a flat
> namespace where a proxy points specific domains to be served by specific
> servers?
>
> In this case I would like to see a specific brick realise that it's
> predominantly the reader/write for a subset of all files and optimise
> it's access at the expense of other bricks which need to access the same
> files (ie I don't just want to turn up the writeback cache, I want cache
> coherency across the entire cluster).  I would accept that random
> read/writes to random bricks would be slower, in return for the
> optimisation that reads/writes would be faster *if* the clients optimise
> themselves to *prefer* to touch specific bricks (ie NUFA).  Such an
> optimisation should not be set in stone of course, if the activity on a
> subdirectory generally seems to move across to another brick then that
> brick should eventually optimise it's read/write performance (at the
> expense that another brick's access now becomes slower to that same
> subset of files.)
>
> Anyone care to quote on this?  Seems like it's a popular performance
> issue on the mailing list and with some optimisation later it also seems
> like the basis for cross datacenter replication?
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Ed W
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-devel mailing list
> Gluster-devel at nongnu.org
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://supercolony.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-devel/attachments/20101006/fe94d3c4/attachment-0003.html>