Pete Zaitcev wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 13:59:28 -0400, Jeff Garzik <[email protected]> wrote:
My point was more that there are real world situations where multiple
outgoing streams from the client is significantly slower than a single
stream into the cloud, plus asking the cloud to perform further copies.
We aren't exposing Chunk to clients outside the cloud, at least at present.
Let's wait and see if applications exist that require it, and how they
compete, say, with a bunch of NFS servers. The biggest difference about
Chunk is its ability to plug into CLD. Drop that and it's not that
special. But you can only use CLD if you are inside the cloud; in fact
it works best when you're inside the same data center with the CLD cell.
So I don't see the bandwidth argument having much weight.
I'm going to remember Fabian's idea of 3-rd party transfers, of course.
That potentially offers a significant reduction of load on tabled.
But mythical outside clients of Chunk are yet to be demostrated.
Note that "mythical outside clients" is a key design element in NFS
v4.1, which is a parallel distributed filesystem technology. chunkd
clients are quite a bit different from CLD clients.
Similarly, Hadoop DFS, CloudStore and GoogleFS clients [analagously]
talk directly to chunkd rather than going through tabled.
Jeff
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe hail-devel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
