Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 16:10:28 -0400 From: Charles Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> To: dima <_pppp@mail.ru> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: is NFS production-ready ? Message-ID: <C5827AAB-D506-490A-A4AF-D510608114DE@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <E1FT224-000F6f-00._pppp-mail-ru@f63.mail.ru> References: <E1FT224-000F6f-00._pppp-mail-ru@f63.mail.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Apr 10, 2006, at 3:26 PM, dima wrote: > First, searching through the archives I'm about to say "No". > > My goal is to provide NFS service to many FreeBSD clients sharing > the exports. The usage pattern appears to be "many reads and not as > much writes". The deployment might look like the following: a SAN > and 2 NFS servers sharing its LUNs. The servers use hot-standby > scheme provided by CARP (or its equivalent). Many FreeBSD clients > would share their exports. I wish servers ran FreeBSD also since > it's the best known OS for the company administrators. The NFS protocol is stateless, but most clients doing writes will use a locking mechanism which is not stateless. In other words, you can easily cluster read-only NFS shares, but this is not true of read- write shares. > The majors are: > - no data corruption > - no hangs (this seems to be the largest problem with current > implementation) > - client retry on failure These two suggest you might be happier with Samba/CIFS. > - a reasonable read speed > > My questions: > 1. NFS/UDP (it's stateless!) is considered to be "evil". Why > (assuming I can grant a balanced network bandwidth)? Dunno, NFS over UDP works just fine. > 2. NFS server implementation seems to be very buggy. Any success > stories? Well, NFS servers can easily run Linux, Solaris etc. NFS works reasonably well on FreeBSD, modulo rpc.lockd. Solaris probably has the best NFS implementation available, and would be a better fileserver platform than almost anything else you've mentioned. NFS on Linux is probably more buggy than NFS on FreeBSD, from what I've seen. > 3. Is at least implementation of NFS client (either kernel-side or > user-space) stable enough for production use? Client OS replacement > is impossible (hardly suitable, really) in my project. NFS on FreeBSD is stable but perhaps not bullet-proof. > PS: The competing options are either SMB or CODA for now. Any other > suggestions? > PPS: I'd be happy to hear that FreeBSD supports at least one really > clustered FS (proprietary ones are also OK). But I think I wouldn't :( I think you can get some amount of the Veritas suite for FreeBSD... -- -Chuck
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?C5827AAB-D506-490A-A4AF-D510608114DE>