[Gluster-users] glusterfs alternative ? :P

[Stas Oskin]

Hi.

AFAIK Lustre is quite slower then GlusterFS being based on Java - can
someone comment about this?

Regards.

2009/1/8 Jerker Nyberg <jerker at update.uu.se>

>
> Hi,
>
> The two interesting open source parallel distributed fault-tolerant file
> systems I have found and tried are GlusterFS and Ceph. Perhaps Lustre will
> be interesting for me in the future if they fix fault-tolerance without
> special shared block storage on the servers. (Or have they?) Mirroring the
> data two or more servers is good enough for me, although I would love some
> RAID-6/RAID-Z -like redundancy.
>
> Ceph is found here <http://ceph.newdream.net/>. I did some benchmarking
> for Ceph a few months ago <http://www.update.uu.se/~jerker/ceph/<http://www.update.uu.se/%7Ejerker/ceph/>>.
> On Ceph
> I got around 65 MByte/s write bandwidth on one node (using "dd") and
> around 120 MByte/s aggregate for the whole cluster (7 nodes).
>
> It was around a year ago the last time I configured and ran GlusterFS on
> the machines, but I do plan to do some better benchmarking for both file
> systems in the not so distant future.
>
> --jerker
>
>
> On Wed, 7 Jan 2009, a_pirania at poczta.onet.pl wrote:
>
> > I know that this is not the appropriate place :). You know someone can
> > alternative to gluserfs ?:)
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users at gluster.org
> http://zresearch.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://supercolony.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20090111/29de7d34/attachment.html>