> It is important to understand that this application is a kind of core > technology for data storage. This means people want to be sure that their > setup does not explode just because they made a kernel update or some other > change where their experience tells them it should have no influence on the > glusterfs service. You want to be sure, just like you are when using nfs. It > just does work (even being in kernel-space!). > Now, answer for yourself if you think glusterfs is as stable as nfs on the > same box. > If you are this confident in NFS, you have had a better experience with it than I have. I have had fileservers with CPU lockups just as described in the log in this thread. They started after I updated the kernel thinking it would be harmless! NFS does *not* just work. There have been (and still are) bugs, incompatibilities between systems that should work, and (biggest problem) baked-in bad design decisions in NFS. Feel free to argue that it does work more often than GlusterFS, or that it is less buggy. That is hardly surprising considering how much more it is used, how much longer it has been around, and how much less it does. Steven Truelove -- Steven Truelove Array Systems Computing, Inc. 1120 Finch Avenue West, 7th Floor Toronto, Ontario M3J 3H7 CANADA http://www.array.ca truelove at array.ca Phone: (416) 736-0900 x307 Fax: (416) 736-4715
