Il 01 giu 2016 22:06, "Gmail" <b.s.mikhael@xxxxxxxxx> ha scritto:
> stat() on NFS, is just a single stat() from the client to the storage node, then all the storage nodes in the same replica group talk to each other using libgfapi (no FUSE overhead)
>
> conclusion, I’d prefer NFS over FUSE with small files.
> drawback, NFS HA is more complicated to setup and maintain than FUSE.
NFS HA with ganesha should be easier than kernel NFS
Skipping the whole fuse stack should be good also for big files
with nfs replication is made directly by gluster servers with no client involved?
In this case would be possibile to split the gluster networks with 10gb used for replication and multiple 1gb bonded for clients.
I can see only advantage for nfs over native gluster
One question: with no gluster client that always know on which node a single file is located, who is telling nfs where to find the required file? Is nfs totally distributed with no "gateway"/"proxy" or any centralized server?
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
