Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 7 Sep 2016 21:55:03 +0530
From:      Amitabh Kant <>
To:        =?UTF-8?Q?Sol=C3=A8ne_Rapenne?= <>
Cc:        "" <>
Subject:   Re: NFS or rsync for sharing files between FreeBSD servers?
Message-ID:  <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References:  <> <>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 9:48 PM, Sol=C3=A8ne Rapenne <> wrote=

> Le 2016-09-07 18:09, Amitabh Kant a =C3=A9crit :
>> We need to share a number of directories between 3 servers running 9.3 .
>> Most of these directories contain php/html/js/images files which do not
>> change frequently.
>> We need to keep the directories in sync on all three servers. Currently,
>> we
>> run a rsync command every time there is a change in one of the
>> files/directories. Sometimes it does happen that we forget to run the
>> rsync
>> script making one of the servers return old versions.
>> That is where we are planning to introduce a nfs_server on one of the
>> servers, while the other two will be nfs_clients accessing the files
>> through a shared directory. I understand that it would present a single
>> point of failure, but in terms of disk access speed, will it make a huge
>> difference further impacting the web servers running on the nfs_client
>> servers ? The servers are connected to each other over gigabit lines, an=
>> the files are themselves not greater than 20-30 kb on an average, with
>> some
>> of  the larger image files somewhere around 4-5 MB.
>> Amitabh
>> _______________________________________________
>> mailing list
>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe
> Hello,
> When does the files changes ? Is it the server changing the files or is i=
> when your team push changes ? If the changes come from your team, just
> change your deployment script to push it to the 3 servers. I would
> recommend rsync because if it doesn't change a lot with a NFS you will ad=
> a SPOF (single point of failure) and overhead for no benefit.
> Kind regards

As of now, files are only changed when the team pushes the change. But
going ahead, we are looking at a scenario where the files auto-generated
through script on one server would be required on other servers too. Using
rsync while running a web server process doesn't seem ok to me. The other
idea is to use the DB server to store the auto-generated files, and fetch
on any of the servers are required. While this is a feasible idea
technically, this might also bloat the DB.

So if NFS overhead is not too huge, I can take a look at it as an option.


Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <>