On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 13:05 -0700, Simon Kirby wrote: > On Thu, Sep 03, 2009 at 10:02:06AM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote: > > > OK, so 16 hash buckets are likely to be filled with ~10^6 entries each. > > I can see that might be a performance issue... > > We have a similar setup with millions of UIDs over NFS (currently NFSv3). > I _wish_ there were a way to use NFSv4 without having to use name-mapped > UIDs and GIDs, since our user and group names come from MySQL anyway, and > are guaranteed to be consistent across machines. That's a separate issue. I'm working on increasing the idmapper scalability, however another project is currently taking up most of my time. I can't guarantee that the revised idmapper code will be finished in time to allow for inclusion in 2.6.32. > Why on earth does NFSv4 force the use of names? NFSv4 aspires to be an internet-wide protocol, and so you cannot use uids/gids: they just aren't guaranteed to represent a unique user outside your local LDAP/NIS or /etc/passwd domain. Furthermore, uids and gids are a posix construct. They simply don't work in environments where you may have lots of non-posix systems. Trond -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
