Em Segunda-feira 21 Fevereiro 2011, ?s 12:01:11, Joe Landman escreveu: > On 02/21/2011 09:53 AM, David Lloyd wrote: > > I'm working with Paul on this. > > > > We did take advice on XFS beforehand, and were given the impression that > > it would just be a performance issue rather than things not actually > > working. > > Hi David > > XFS works fine as a backing store for GlusterFS. We've deployed this > now to many customer sites, and have not run into issues with it. That's nice to hear. Next time i setup a gluster volume i'm going to take a look at xfs as a backend. BTW Joe, these deployments with xfs as backend fs, which version of gluster have you used ? > > We've got quite fast hardware, and are more comfortable with XFS that > > ext4 from our own experience so we did our own tests and were happy with > > XFS performance. > > There are many reasons to choose XFS in general, and there are no > issues with using it with GlusterFS. Especially on large file transfers. Indeed it is. But i was with the 3.0x series docs on my mind still. > > Likewise, we're aware of the very poor performance of gluster with small > > files. We serve a lot of large files, and we're now moved most of the > > small files off to a normal nfs server. Again small files aren't known > > to break gluster are they? > > Small files are the bane of every cluster file system. We recommend > using NFS client with GlusterFS for smaller files, simply due to the > additional caching you can get out of the NFS system. Good to know. Thanks for the tip. > Regards, > > Joe
