[Gluster-users] ganesha BFS

[Prasun Gera]

Thanks. For small files and random I/O, nfs has been recommended over fuse.
Would pNFS, with multiple MDS'es in the future, be the recommended approach
for small files ?

On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:03 PM, Soumya Koduri <skoduri at redhat.com> wrote:

> It depends on the workload. Like native NFS, even with NFS-Ganesha, data
> is routed through the server where its mounted from. In addition NFSv4.x
> protocol adds more complexity and cannot be directly compared with NFSv3
> traffic. However with pNFS, I/O is routed to data servers directly by the
> NFS clients which results in performance gain for larger I/O workloads.
> Also we do have plan to support multiple metadata servers going forward.
>
> Thanks,
> Soumya
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Prasun Gera" <prasun.gera at gmail.com>
> To: "Joe Julian" <joe at julianfamily.org>
> Cc: gluster-users at gluster.org
> Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 2:55:17 AM
> Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] ganesha BFS
>
> And do either of them perform better than fuse mounts ? With native nfs,
> all data is routed through the server where it's mounted from, which makes
> HA and load balancing difficult. For pNFS, there is a single metadata
> server. How does that affect HA and load ? I thought one of the main goals
> of gluster was decentralized metadata. Where do the four options (fuse,
> native nfs, nfsv4, pnfs ) stand in terms of benefits and disadvantages ?
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Joe Julian < joe at julianfamily.org >
> wrote:
>
>
>
> nfs-ganesha is a much more feature rich nfs server that uses libgfapi to
> access the gluster volume in userspace. This userspace solution avoids the
> context switches like the native gluster nfs does, but adds support for
> pnfs/nfsv4 and udp.
>
> From the development standpoint, they have a full set of developers
> working only on and focused only on their nfs server whereas the gluster
> version was implemented as a stop-gap to provide a solution where the
> kernel nfs re-share was failing.
>
> I think nfs-ganesha is a better solution. There is integration work being
> done in glusterfs to make its use seamless, so I suspect that's the
> long-term nfs solution that will eventually replace gluster's native nfs.
>
>
> On 08/12/2015 09:54 AM, paf1 at email.cz wrote:
>
>
>
> Hello Dears,
>
> can anybody explain advanteges / disadvantages of Ganesha NFS ??
> Will U reccomend me go through this way ??
> ( 4 node glusterFS )
> regs.
> Pavel
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users at gluster.org
> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users at gluster.org
> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users at gluster.org
> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20150812/9bb3b762/attachment.html>