On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 07:14:51PM -0700, Alexandr Normuradov wrote:
>>From real world experience we used IBMs GPFS. Very stable, has
>multiple clients drivers and robust manuals. Cost alot but actually
>works.

How much is "a lot"?  he asks curiously... 

Also, how good is IBM's support for this?  That was a concern the boss had
(and so do I), that Coda's support would be sketchy at best... I've dealt at
the driver level before but it's been a *long* time... 

More info:  Database servers write lots (maybe 10k/day?) of little PDF's to
shared filesystem; apps servers read'em, print'em, etc.  I've not seen
anything indicating anyone has optimized for many small files; much to the
contrary (optimized for database use, few large files).  

-- Glenn


>On Tuesday, 5 April 2011, Derek Simkowiak <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>     I looked at CODA for a cluster back in 2004 and decided I'd never use it.
>>
>>     It's far more complex than any other filesystem I've worked with.  It's 
>> the only one that requires a special "log" partition, a special "metadata" 
>> partition, and requires you to enter hex addresses for the starting 
>> locations of certain data blocks.
>>
>>     Consider this paragraph from the CODA manual that tells you how big the 
>> RVM partition should be:
>>
>> As a rule of thumb, you will need about 3-5% of the total file data space 
>> for recoverable storage. We currently use 4% as a good value under most 
>> circumstances. In our systems the data segment is 90Meg for approximately 
>> 3.2 gigabytes of disk space. By making it smaller, you can reduce server 
>> startup time. However, if you run out of space on the RVM Data partition, 
>> you will be forced to reinitialize the system, a costly penalty. So, plan 
>> accordingly.
>>
>>     Okay, so... I've never used CODA before, and I'm not sure what my 
>> filesystem will look like.  There is no way their ancient example numbers 
>> for "3.2 gigabytes" scales up to today's filesystems that are closer to 3.2 
>> terabytes.  How am I supposed to know what initial values to choose?  If I 
>> guess wrong, it'll only destroy the entire filesystem.  I can understand 
>> inode size... but I can't understand this.
>>
>>     And configuring the RVM (metadata) looks like this (again from the 
>> manual -- those hex values are supposed to be magically chosen and entered 
>> by the user):
>>
>> $ rdsinit /dev/hdc1 /dev/sdb1
>>
>> Enter the length of the device /dev/sdb1: 119070700
>>
>> Going to initialize data file to zero, could take awhile.
>> done.
>> rvm_initialize succeeded.
>>
>> starting address of rvm: 0x50000000
>> heap len: 0x1000000
>> static len: 0x100000
>> nlists: 80
>> chunksize: 32
>>
>> rds_zap_heap completed successfully.
>> rvm_terminate succeeded.
>>
>> [Note: Use of the decimal value for the length of the device and the use of 
>> hex values for the address and lengths of the next three values.]
>>
>>     I absolutely love that little note... use decimal value for the first 
>> value, and hex for everything else.  Don't forget! :)  And the manual says 
>> that they use 0x50000000 (or was it 0x500000000?  can't remember) for 
>> Intel-based architectures running Linux or FreeBSD... but nothing about 
>> other platforms.  The tools, documentation, and skilled technicians 
>> necessary in an emergency just don't seem to be there for CODA.
>>
>>     In short, managing CODA seems to be about on par with managing a big 
>> database.  Too complex, too many options, and you need an in-house expert to 
>> keep the thing running.
>>
>>
>>> /A big item on our wishlist is the ability to both have multiple hosts 
>>> writing to the distributed filesystem/
>>
>>     NFS or Samba.  Cross-platform, any error message you come across is 
>> guaranteed to show up in a Google search, and any version of Linux comes 
>> with either of these ready to go.
>>
>>     (There are others, like SSHFS and WebDAV, but they don't support the 
>> concept of UIDs and GIDs.)
>>
>>
>>> /*and* have read-only backup copies on standby hosts (which could then be 
>>> converted to active in the event of catastrophe)/
>>
>>     How will this filesystem be used?  Is this for a company file server, or 
>> for some real-time shared storage for a public server cluster?
>>
>>     Note that hot mirrors (like CODA or RAID) are only part of the solution. 
>>  They won't protect you if you accidentally delete the wrong file, or if you 
>> get rooted by a script kiddie.
>>
>>     I use rsnapshot (which does rsync incrementals like Apple's Time 
>> Machine) run once every hour, to an offsite backup server.  My backups are 
>> always online in a read-only fashion, ready for use at any time.  If my 
>> primary server melts, then I've lost (at most) an hour of work.  Plus, I 
>> have incrementals -- I can instantly see any of my files as they existed 3 
>> hours, 4 days, or 5 months ago.  Using SSH keys it's all encrypted and fully 
>> automatic.  And if there's a disaster, I'm not dealing with any magic 
>> partition sizes or other such nonsense -- it's just files on a disk.
>>
>>
>> --Derek
>>
>> On 04/05/2011 04:27 PM, Glenn Stone wrote:
>>
>> $NEWCOMPANY is having major issues with OCFS, and I'm looking into
>> alternatives for replacing it.  A big item on our wishlist is the ability to
>> both have multiple hosts writing to the distributed filesystem, *and* have
>> read-only backup copies on standby hosts (which could then be converted to
>> active in the event of catastrophe).  Coda seems to fit this bill, from what
>> I've been able to google up.  I'm not, however, able to determine if this
>> thing is still in an R&D phase, or ready for prime time; it seems to maybe
>> kinda slowly still be being worked on? (Latest RPM's are dated 1/26/2010).
>>
>> Exploring alternatives,
>> Glenn
>>
>> Listen: I'm a politician, which means I'm a cheat and a liar, and when I'm
>> not kissing babies I'm stealing their lollipops. But it also means I keep my
>> options open.  -- Jeffery Pelt, "Red October"
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>-- 
>Sincerely,
>Alexandr Normuradov
>425-522-3703
>

-- 
Glenn R. Stone, [email protected]          |   .~.   Geek by Nature 
RHCE, Technomage, Linux and other Mysteries      |  / V \  -------------- 
There ARE no dress rehearsals.  We ARE           | /(   )\ Linux by Choice
professionals, and this IS the Big Time.         |  ^^-^^                  

Reply via email to