Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 16:42:26 -0400 (EDT) From: Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca> To: linda@kateley.com Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: pNFS server Plan B Message-ID: <661035450.164996651.1466541746806.JavaMail.zimbra@uoguelph.ca> In-Reply-To: <5ccbd619-88f2-8480-727a-4b70f11a35ba@kateley.com> References: <1524639039.147096032.1465856925174.JavaMail.zimbra@uoguelph.ca> <D20C793E-A2FD-49F3-AD88-7C2FED5E7715@ixsystems.com> <CACA0VUibM1giAkJdNNkn1_m8QqqLzdNC86hFhRxMmY7gMb1nvg@mail.gmail.com> <74CD7EB1-1656-4511-8B63-5C4401D1BB8D@ixsystems.com> <5ccbd619-88f2-8480-727a-4b70f11a35ba@kateley.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Linda Kateley wrote: > I have really enjoyed this discussion. Just to echo this point further. > I have spent most of my career with 1 foot in opensource and the other 3 > feet in the enterprise(And yes I have 4 feet.). Enterprise always makes > decisions based on reliability or someone telling them something is > reliable. If you ask 100 vmware admins why they use nfs probably 100 > will say because vmware recommends it. If you ask a CT at vmware why > they recommend it, the couple I have asked have said because it is a > reliable transport. >=20 > Vmware now has interest in pnfs. >=20 > Technology gets driven by business/enterprise. I talked to a CA at a > large electronics chain and asked why they are using ceph and he said > about 100 words, then said because red hat recommends it with openstack. >=20 > Intel is driving lustre. RHEL driving ceph. Vmware driving pnfs. I don't > see anyone driving gluster. >=20 I don't know of any vendors (Redhat people basically maintain it, afaik), b= ut Jordan sent me this a little while back: https://www.socallinuxexpo.org/scale/14x/presentations/scaling-glusterfs-fa= cebook Facebook is a user, but a large one. Although GlusterFS seems to supports OpenStack stuff, it seems to be layere= d on top of the POSIX file system using something they call SwiftOnFile. Thanks for the comments, rick > Every once in awhile you see products grow on their merit(watching > proxmox and zerto right now) but those usually get swooped up by a > bigger one. >=20 > To the point of setting up kerberized nfs, AD has made kerberos easy, it > could be just as easy with nfs. Everything is easy once you know it. >=20 > lk >=20 >=20 > On 6/20/16 9:54 PM, Jordan Hubbard wrote: > > OK, wow. This appears to have turned into something of a referendum on= NFS > > and, just based on Rick and Doug=E2=80=99s defense of pNFS, I also thin= k my > > commentary on that may have been misconstrued somewhat. > > > > So, let me just set the record straight by saying that I=E2=80=99m all = in favor of > > pNFS. It addresses a very definite need in the Enterprise marketplace = and > > gives FreeBSD yet another arrow in its quiver when it comes to being = =E2=80=9Ca > > player=E2=80=9D in that (ever-growing) arena. The only point I was try= ing to make > > before was that if we could ALSO address clustering in a more general w= ay > > as part of providing a pNFS solution, that would be great. I am not, > > however, the one writing the code and if my comments were in any way > > discouraging to the folks that are, I apologize and want to express my > > enthusiasm for it. If iXsystems engineering resources can contribute i= n > > any way to moving this ball forward, let me know and we=E2=80=99ll star= t doing so. > > > > On the more general point of =E2=80=9CNFS is hard, let=E2=80=99s go sho= pping=E2=80=9D let me also > > say that it=E2=80=99s kind of important not to conflate end-user target= ed > > solutions with enterprise solutions. Setting up a Kerberized NFSv4, fo= r > > example, is not really designed to be trivial to set up and if anyone i= s > > waiting for that to happen, they may be waiting a very long time (like, > > forever). NFS and SMB are both fairly simple technologies to use if yo= u > > restrict yourself to using, say, just 20% of their overall feature-sets= . > > Once you add ACLs, Directory Services, user/group and permissions > > mappings, and any of the other more enterprise-centric features of thes= e > > filesharing technologies, however, things rapidly get more complicated = and > > the DevOps people who routinely play in these kinds of environments are > > quite happy to have all those options available because they=E2=80=99re= not > > consumers operating in consumer environments. > > > > Sun didn=E2=80=99t design NFS to be particularly consumer-centric, for = that matter, > > and if you think SMB is =E2=80=9Csimple=E2=80=9D because you clicked Ne= twork on Windows > > Explorer one day and stuff just automagically appeared, you should try > > operating it in a serious Windows Enterprise environment (just flip > > through some of the SMB bugs in the FreeNAS bug tracker - > > https://bugs.freenas.org/projects/freenas/issues?utf8=3D=E2=9C=93&set_f= ilter=3D1&f%5B%5D=3Dstatus_id&op%5Bstatus_id%5D=3D*&f%5B%5D=3Dcategory_id&o= p%5Bcategory_id%5D=3D%3D&v%5Bcategory_id%5D%5B%5D=3D57&f%5B%5D=3D&c%5B%5D= =3Dtracker&c%5B%5D=3Dstatus&c%5B%5D=3Dpriority&c%5B%5D=3Dsubject&c%5B%5D=3D= assigned_to&c%5B%5D=3Dupdated_on&c%5B%5D=3Dfixed_version&group_by=3D > > - if you want to see the kinds of problems users wrestle with all the > > time). > > > > Anyway, I=E2=80=99ll get off the soapbox now, I just wanted to dispute = the premise > > that =E2=80=9Csimple file sharing=E2=80=9D that is also =E2=80=9Csecure= file sharing=E2=80=9D and > > =E2=80=9Cflexible file sharing=E2=80=9D doesn=E2=80=99t really exist. = The simplest end-user > > oriented file sharing system I=E2=80=99ve used to date is probably AFP,= and Apple > > has been trying to kill it for years, probably because it doesn=E2=80= =99t have all > > those extra knobs and Kerberos / Directory Services integration busines= s > > users have been asking for (it=E2=80=99s also not particularly industry= standard). > > > > - Jordan > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > freebsd-fs@freebsd.org mailing list > > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >=20 > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-fs@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?661035450.164996651.1466541746806.JavaMail.zimbra>