On 01/24/2011 07:51 PM, yvette hirth wrote:
Gordan Bobic wrote:
On 01/24/2011 07:16 PM, yvette hirth wrote:
hi all,
does anyone have any performance comparisons of gfs2 v. zfs?
our five-node cluster is working fine, the clustering software is great,
but when accessing gfs2-based files, enumeration can be very slow...
The comparison is a bit like comparing apples and oranges. GFS is a
cluster file system, ZFS is a single-machine file system.
Gordan
--
Linux-cluster mailing list
Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
my apologies. i heard zfs was cluster-aware; thanks for the info.
does anyone have any performance comparisons of gfs2 v. any other
cluster-aware filesystems?
You may want to google about GFS / GFS2 / OCFS2. That's pretty much all
that is freely available as far as cluster file systems that live
directly on top of block devices go.
The original OCFS (Oracle) and VMFS (VMware) work in a similar way but
they are designed for few large files rather than many small files so
they aren't suitable for generic use.
Symantec Veritas Cluster also comes with a similar cluster aware file
system, but it's heavily licenced and last time I checked it didn't
provide any compelling reasons to use it instead of GFS, GFS2 or OCFS2.
There are a few other things available that may be more suitable for
what you want to do, but it's impossible to say without knowing more
about your use-case. Depending on ecactly what you require you may find
that SeznamFS, GlusterFS, Lustre or even HDFS (Hadoop) are more suitable
for what you want to do.
Gordan
--
Linux-cluster mailing list
Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
