Previously in a slightly different configuration I had only a slight performance hit with IBM's GPFS.
Rick Stevens wrote:
vahram wrote:
Raw throughput isn't really an issue for us. We're more interested in seek times. My biggest concern with GFS is stability and performance...any feedback in regards to that would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
So far, GFS has worked quite well under our tests. We have yet to have it break. Our current GFS implementation is only on two nodes with gulm running on a separate lock server. I intend to update the kernels on those nodes sometime this week (to the 2.6.11 variety) and change the locking from gulm to cman (since that seems to be fixed at this point).
Again not too sure about the different locking mechanisms .. do you mean cman/dlm? will this work better for you?
-- ************************************************************
Ivan Ivanyi
Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics
1, rue Michel Servet
CH-1211 Genève 4
Switzerland Tel: (+41 22) 379 58 33
Fax: (+41 22) 379 58 58
E-mail: Ivan.Ivanyi@xxxxxxxxxx************************************************************ PGP signature http://www.expasy.org/people/Ivan.Ivanyi.gpg
