Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2012 19:06:47 -0400 (EDT) From: Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca> To: David Magda <dmagda@ee.ryerson.ca> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Chris Nehren <apeiron+freebsd-stable@isuckatdomains.net> Subject: Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ? Message-ID: <1431674734.1241120.1338678407805.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca> In-Reply-To: <4D744565-4073-485E-B769-82BE1F7E2C0A@ee.ryerson.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
David Magda wrote: > On Jun 1, 2012, at 21:03, Chris Nehren wrote: > > > You say your'e using ZVOLs but then recommend gluster for large > > filesystems. I would like to take a moment to point out that one of > > the > > design goals of ZFS was to scale beyond the capabilities of current > > hardware. > > > > What does gluster do that ZFS does not? I'm not trying to troll > > here, > > but am genuinely curious about ZFS's shortfalls in one of the > > problem > > domains it seeks to address. > > ZFS is for storing file systems on locally connected block devices. > Gluster is a network file system where data can be distributed over > many nodes. > > So ZFS can ensure that bits-on-disk stay safe through checksums and > mirroring / RAIDZ, while Gluster allows entire file servers to go > offline and the files are still accessible because you have a kind of > network-level RAID going on. This also helps in performance since > instead of clients pounding on one file server (as usually happens > with NFS), every write is sent to many data nodes so you're striping > across many network elements. Think of it as NFS on steroids. > > A competitive open source equivalent would be Lustre, while Isilon and > Panasas would probably be commercial alternatives (though they do NFS > / CIFS on the 'front-end' and the distributed "magic" occurs on a > 'back-end' network between the appliances). > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GlusterFS > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lustre_(file_system) > Just fyi, someone is currently working on an NFSv4.1 pNFS layout type for Lustre. As such, once that layout is implemented, the NFSv4.1 client I am working on should be able to use a Lustre server cluster. So, it could be a while (next summer, maybe?), but that should be FreeBSD eventually. (I have no idea how easy porting of the Lustre server to FreeBSD would be?) Having said the above, I am not familiar with either Gluster or Lustre, so take the above as based on what little I currently know, rick > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1431674734.1241120.1338678407805.JavaMail.root>