On 12/09/2010 01:49 PM, Dusan Djordjevic wrote:
Hi all,
Since we would need to change some config on web farm layer, I
consider moving it to Red Hat 6. Architecture that I do have in mind
is:
Load Balancer
4 x web server (Red Hat 6, Apache out of box)
NetApp storage mounted via NFS
Site serves mainly static content and connects to Tomcat app servers.
Sometimes it can have thousands of simultaneous connections.
I do not have any recent experience with NFS storage, especially with
Red Hat 6.
Any advices for or against this solution ?
Performance wise, is it going to work properly ?
Any other things I should think about before I do this ?
Thanks in advance.
Dusan
The most notable difference in terms of NFS in RHEL 6 is that of NFS
version 4. NFSv4 is used now by default amongst RHEL boxes that support
it and in doing so it offers some advantages over the previous default (v3).
Apart from the lack of rpcbind, which could slow things down, the most
important benefit is FS-Cache (Solaris folk use the cachefs equivalent).
http://docs.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/Storage_Administration_Guide/fscachenfs.html
FS-Cache benefits vary and are scenario dependent (there are cases where
I have seen it to slow down things). But on a typical read-only scenario
over dedicated Gigabit Ethernet links (Jumbo frames on)between the
Apache server and the NFS box (RHEL 6) gave us a 20%-30% boost. So, for
our platform, we find that RHEL6 (web)<->RHEL 6(NFS) is faster than RHEL
5(web)<->Netapp (NFS).
Your case might be different.
GM
--
--
George Magklaras
Senior Systems Engineer/IT Manager
Biotek Center, University of Oslo
EMBnet TMPC Chair
http://folk.uio.no/georgios
Tel: +47 22840535
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
