Hi Jean-Marc, Do you have a test on which NFS performs much better. We'd like to know more about that.
If you go bak on this list, you will see that Lustre can handsomely beat NFS at unpacking archives, for example. So I am curious. - Peter - > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Jean-Marc Saffroy > Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 9:30 PM > To: Andreas Dilger > Cc: Lin Shen (lshen); Lustre User Discussion Mailing List > Subject: Re: [Lustre-discuss] Lustre Lite > > On Fri, 3 Nov 2006, Andreas Dilger wrote: > > > You should be able to run a database on top of Lustre, but > this is not > > a common mode of operation for our current customers and I > don't know > > how well it functions. > > Maybe poor performance is what limits adoption of Lustre for > transactional > workloads: I heard some stories of users trying database-like > access (ie. > updates of many small files) on Lustre, with mixed or > terrible results. > > NFS gives much better results with small files, but it does > not scale well, and it lacks good POSIX conformance (ie. wrt caching). > > Too bad we don't have the best of both worlds! > > > -- > Jean-Marc Saffroy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _______________________________________________ > Lustre-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.clusterfs.com/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss _______________________________________________ Lustre-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.clusterfs.com/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
