[Gluster-users] ZFS + Linux + Glusterfs for a production ready 100+ TB NAS on cloud

[Tristan Ball]

I'm curious as to what ZFS options you're finding necessary to tune for what kind of applications? Are you willing to share? :-)

Thanks,
        Tristan



Tristan Ball - Hosted Services Manager VIC
Pronto Hosted Services
20 Lakeside Drive, Burwood East, VIC 3151
Phone: +61 3 9887 7770 | Email: tristanb at pronto.com.au
Mobile: +61 408 397 473


For PHS helpdesk support, please email phs at pronto.com.au
For urgent after hours support phone: 1800 622 556

---Legal Notice---
The email message and any attachments are confidential and subject to copyright. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, interference with, disclosure or copying of this material is unauthorised and prohibited. No part may be reproduced, adapted or transmitted without the written permission of the copyright owner. If you have received this email in error, please immediately advise the sender by return email and delete the message from your system. Before opening or using attachments, check for viruses and defects. Our liability is limited to re-supplying any affected attachments.

-----Original Message-----
From: gluster-users-bounces at gluster.org [mailto:gluster-users-bounces at gluster.org] On Behalf Of Liam Slusser
Sent: Saturday, 1 October 2011 6:38 AM
To: landman at scalableinformatics.com
Cc: gluster-users at gluster.org; rdp.com at gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] ZFS + Linux + Glusterfs for a production ready 100+ TB NAS on cloud

I've used ZFS in lots of different roles and I've found that out of the box ZFS performs decent but to get really great performance out of the (zfs) filesystem you really need to tune it for the application.
ZFS has tons and tons of somewhat hidden features (edit /etc/system and reboot type stuff) and if set correctly has outstanding performance.

liam

On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 10:58 AM, Joe Landman <landman at scalableinformatics.com> wrote:
> This said, please understand that there is a (significant) performance
> cost to all those nice features in ZFS.  And there is a reason why its
> not generally considered a high performance file system.  So if you
> start building with it, you shouldn't necessarily think that the whole
> is going to be faster than the sum of the parts.  Might be worse.
>
> This is a caution from someone who has tested/shipped many different
> file systems in the past.  ZFS included, on Solaris and other
> machines.  There is a very significant performance penalty one pays
> for using some of these features.  You have to decide if this penalty is worth it.
_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users at gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users