Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2005 11:56:38 +0200 From: Philippe PEGON <Philippe.Pegon@crc.u-strasbg.fr> To: Claus Guttesen <kometen@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD as nfs-server Message-ID: <42CCFC56.3090809@crc.u-strasbg.fr> In-Reply-To: <b41c75520507070224227c70e1@mail.gmail.com> References: <b41c75520507070224227c70e1@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Claus Guttesen a écrit : > Hi. Hi, > > Last week I phased out my remaining trusty FreeBSD nfs-server. The > first was phased out three weeks ago. They have served me well for > about two year and I have been *very* satisfied with the performance > and stability. The below mentioned reasons made the decision easier to > migrate to veritas volume manager on solaris. > > 1. Lack of a journaling filesystem. > 2. Lack of a logical volume manager. > > My intent is *not* to start a flamewar, simpy stating why I had to migrate. > > Additional comments to item #1: > We have background-fsck, what's wrong with that? > > Well, there is nothing wrong with that in a way. Background-fsck does > work, but my nfs-server have had three unplanned reboots during that > time, none of them was caused by the nfs-server itself, but caused by > other factors. The server comes back up as it should and detects that > the volumes wasn't unmounted in an orderly fashion and defers the > volume to background-fsck. So far so good. > > When the background-fsck is done with one volume and it jumps to the > next, my webservers connected to the nfs-server are unable to read and > write to the nfs-volumes for a period of 15-30 minutes. The smallest > (of several) volume is 400 GB and the largest (of several) is 2 TB. > The outcome is that my website is seen as being inaccessible. This was > with FreeBSD 5.2 beta through 5.4 I saw this behaviour. we switched our mail server to Linux for your first reason : see http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/htdig/freebsd-stable/2005-June/thread.html#15751 > > So I'm delighted to read that the initial work on a journaling > filesystem has started. > > Additional comments to item #2: > Use vinum! > > Is it vinum or gvinum which is the future of FreeBSD? > > The docs related to vinum refers to some parameters in newfs not > present in the manual-pages. > > As more volumes are added the task of configuring (g)vinum will become > more and more timeconsuming and errorprone. Does it recover correctly > in the event of a crash, how about fsck/newfs on volumes larger than 2 > TB? > > > The camcontrol program on FreeBSD is a very robust tool. This is one > program I miss. Some parameters to the find- and date-commands on > FreeBSD aren't there on solaris, so I'll keep the old nfs-server > around for doing day2day maintenance. > > I'm keeping FreeBSD as webservers (of course). > > regards > Claus -- Philippe PEGON
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?42CCFC56.3090809>