From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 13 08:23:09 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0793816A401 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2007 08:23:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from drumslayer2@yahoo.com) Received: from web34502.mail.mud.yahoo.com (web34502.mail.mud.yahoo.com [66.163.178.168]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C7F1913C481 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2007 08:23:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from drumslayer2@yahoo.com) Received: (qmail 63128 invoked by uid 60001); 13 Feb 2007 07:56:27 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=yzNEsKsI1A1rxtaZpTt0c37cgMtMesft6JJDRQ5jCC92L6AgsexAIYy72W7W4J8WpAFovB1b+1SN/keXKRX7SyiM3W0XhZXWZgqbbX8odLr3P040gsnQ0YeIwNZ0j4AsztwVUL5L1ypGVv+t12VmoOtfxS4VS1OiZ1qI1E3qf+E= ; Message-ID: <20070213075627.63126.qmail@web34502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: vRZqnqQVM1nlQhNE4k9lpp6VkHNZSUDZJkoD8AxYry8vLcNyXMsKMZM5TA195wC7lw-- Received: from [67.112.21.27] by web34502.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 23:56:27 PST Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 23:56:27 -0800 (PST) From: Nicole Harrington To: Eric Anderson , Chris Haulmark In-Reply-To: <45CD6FF5.8070007@freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: UFS2 with SAN X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 08:23:09 -0000 --- Eric Anderson wrote: > On 02/10/07 00:54, Chris Haulmark wrote: > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Eric Anderson [mailto:anderson@freebsd.org] > >> Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2007 12:48 AM > >> To: Chris Haulmark > >> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org > >> Subject: Re: UFS2 with SAN > >> > >> On 02/09/07 19:30, Chris Haulmark wrote: > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> I am looking into setting up a SAN with several > web servers that > >>> will be clustered. It would be a FC network > using Qlogic cards > >>> in each of those FreeBSD web servers. It would > be about 5+ > >>> of those web servers. > >>> > >>> I want to have the capability to share the same > web data across > >>> those web servers. I have scorched the entire > mailing list and > >>> found that there were some work on GFS porting > over to FreeBSD. > >>> It seems like that it is just all talk and if I > am wrong, could > >>> you have my head turned over to where I can find > out how to enable > >>> GFS on those FreeBSD systems. > >> GFS on FreeBSD is indeed dead. Not enough people > stepped up to help > >> port it. > > > > I really feared to hear that! > > > >>> If GFS is out of question, which file system am > I recommendeded > >>> to attempt to use for this SAN setup? > >> NFS. > >> > >>> My first thought to use UFS2 and attempt is to > allow only one web > >>> server to have a write/read access while the > reminder would be > >>> read only access. That should prevent from > lockings that is similar > >>> on NFS/NAS. > >> This will result it the read/write system seeing > the data ok, and the > >> rest getting corrupt data without knowing it, and > probably crashing. > >> UFS2 is not cluster aware. You could mount all > the hosts read only, > >> and > >> then update the mount point on one to rw, makes > changes, then back to > >> ro, then unmount/remount on the other boxes. > > > > That's my original idea if I do not have anything > else better to go > > with. > > > >> That's all still a kludge to simulate what NFS > will do for you. Why > >> won't NFS work for you? > > > > I have a client who wants to go from NAS to a true > SAN solution with > > full > > fibre channel network. I would hate to lose the > opportunity for this > > client > > to continue using FreeBSD as the choice of OS for > his web servers. > > Currently, > > his set up is using NAS with NFS. He complains of > locking files that > > occurs > > too often. > > > > I had hoped to find more better solution and make > this client much more > > happier > > with all the FreeBSD support that can be provided. > > > Well, I'm not sure what issues they had, but have > had fantastic success > with NFS and FreeBSD. FreeBSD with the right > hardware and tweaks can > make some NetApp boxes look weak. *cough* WAFL > *cough* > > > >> I agree that it would be fantastic to have a > clustered file system for > >> FreeBSD, and I've done lot's of hunting and > nagging vendors to support > >> it - but it's just not there. > > > > We should get few bandwagons and get in circle. > It could be likely that > > I could > > provide access for the developers to test and get > whatever file system > > and other > > necessaries needed to be working. :) > > > The problem isn't the environment or hardware, it's > developers skilled > to do the work. They're all either in NDA's, off > writing something > else, or just too busy to provide any amount of > input. > > Eric I have a set of servers NFS mounted to a Netapp and after hurs of tuning with netapp's help. (after getting through the idiots adking what FreeBSd was) I got very low performance. I was of course then told by Netapp to switch to Linux for better NFS support. I would love for any help with tuning this further, but I cannot say that FreeBSD with Netapp NFS will be great. Of course, I have not been able to test if indeed Linux would be any better. I will say however that I have a large number of small files which tends to not do well with NFS. Nicole