<div dir="ltr">Thanks. For small files and random I/O, nfs has been recommended over fuse. Would pNFS, with multiple MDS'es in the future, be the recommended approach for small files ?</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:03 PM, Soumya Koduri <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:skoduri@redhat.com" target="_blank">skoduri@redhat.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">It depends on the workload. Like native NFS, even with NFS-Ganesha, data is routed through the server where its mounted from. In addition NFSv4.x protocol adds more complexity and cannot be directly compared with NFSv3 traffic. However with pNFS, I/O is routed to data servers directly by the NFS clients which results in performance gain for larger I/O workloads. Also we do have plan to support multiple metadata servers going forward.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Soumya<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
----- Original Message -----<br>
From: "Prasun Gera" <<a href="mailto:prasun.gera@gmail.com">prasun.gera@gmail.com</a>><br>
To: "Joe Julian" <<a href="mailto:joe@julianfamily.org">joe@julianfamily.org</a>><br>
Cc: <a href="mailto:gluster-users@gluster.org">gluster-users@gluster.org</a><br>
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 2:55:17 AM<br>
Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] ganesha BFS<br>
<br>
And do either of them perform better than fuse mounts ? With native nfs, all data is routed through the server where it's mounted from, which makes HA and load balancing difficult. For pNFS, there is a single metadata server. How does that affect HA and load ? I thought one of the main goals of gluster was decentralized metadata. Where do the four options (fuse, native nfs, nfsv4, pnfs ) stand in terms of benefits and disadvantages ?<br>
<br>
<br>
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Joe Julian < <a href="mailto:joe@julianfamily.org">joe@julianfamily.org</a> > wrote:<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
nfs-ganesha is a much more feature rich nfs server that uses libgfapi to access the gluster volume in userspace. This userspace solution avoids the context switches like the native gluster nfs does, but adds support for pnfs/nfsv4 and udp.<br>
<br>
>From the development standpoint, they have a full set of developers working only on and focused only on their nfs server whereas the gluster version was implemented as a stop-gap to provide a solution where the kernel nfs re-share was failing.<br>
<br>
I think nfs-ganesha is a better solution. There is integration work being done in glusterfs to make its use seamless, so I suspect that's the long-term nfs solution that will eventually replace gluster's native nfs.<br>
<br>
<br>
On 08/12/2015 09:54 AM, <a href="mailto:paf1@email.cz">paf1@email.cz</a> wrote:<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Hello Dears,<br>
<br>
can anybody explain advanteges / disadvantages of Ganesha NFS ??<br>
Will U reccomend me go through this way ??<br>
( 4 node glusterFS )<br>
regs.<br>
Pavel<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Gluster-users mailing list <a href="mailto:Gluster-users@gluster.org">Gluster-users@gluster.org</a> <a href="http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users</a><br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Gluster-users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Gluster-users@gluster.org">Gluster-users@gluster.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users</a><br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Gluster-users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Gluster-users@gluster.org">Gluster-users@gluster.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>