Brandon Lamb wrote:
Has anyone replaced nfs with glusterfs using no afr/unify, just a pure nfs replacement? I ask this as a way to take a baby step into using glusterfs, first going from nfs to glusterfs, then when these quirks that are going around in recent threads about afr are worked out switching to replication. BUT, original most important question, anyone seen that glusterfs is faster, better than using an nfs server?
I have seen good streaming performance from glusterfs that would exceed my NFS servers. However, since I did not run glusterfs on the exact same hardware, I cannot say for certain that it is better. I will need someone else to explain this further, but my important tasks that run on NFS (compiling), NFS is still faster. For instance, compiling a current linux kernel takes about 400 seconds on NFS, but about 1100 on GlusterFS. I think this has to do with client-side write caching, but I am not positive. I have tried different translators on the client to try and improve the compiling performance, but have had no success. I would be interesting in understanding better what is going on and if it is fixable. Craig
_______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
-- Craig Tierney (craig.tierney@xxxxxxxx)
