UFS2 with SAN

[Jeff Mohler]

For certain workloads, linux is far better tuned for NFS than Fbsd..netapp
as a server or not.



On 2/12/07, Nicole Harrington <drumslayer2 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> --- Eric Anderson <anderson at freebsd.org> wrote:
>
> > On 02/10/07 00:54, Chris Haulmark wrote:
> > >
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: Eric Anderson [mailto:anderson at freebsd.org]
> > >> Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2007 12:48 AM
> > >> To: Chris Haulmark
> > >> Cc: freebsd-fs at 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-fs at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>