Hello all... I think all of you agree that "performance" is a great topic in NFS. So, when we talk about NFS and ZFS we imagine a great combination/solution. But one is not dependent on another, actually are two well distinct technologies. ZFS has a lot of features that all we know about, and "maybe", all of us want in a NFS share (maybe not). The point is: Two technologies with diferent priorities. So, what i think is important, is a "document" (here on NFS/ZFS discuss), that lists and explains the ZFS features that have a "real" performance impact. I know that there is the solarisinternals wiki about ZFS/NFS integration, but what i think is really important is a comparison between Linux and Solaris/ZFS on server side. That would be very useful to see for example, what "consistency" i have with Linux and (XFS, ext3, etc), with "that" performance. And "how" can i configure a similar NFS service on solaris/ZFS. Here we have some information about it: http://blogs.sun.com/roch/entry/nfs_and_zfs_a_fine but there is no relation with Linux, what i think is important. What i do mean, is that the people that knows a lot about the NFS protocol, and about the filesystem features, should make such comparison (to facilitate the adoption and users' comparison). I think there are many users comparing oranges with apples. Another example (correct me if i am wrong), Until the kernel 2.4.20 (at least), the default export option for sync/async was "async" (in solaris i think always was "sync"). Another point was about the "commit" operation in vers2, that was not implemented, the server just reply with an "OK", but the data was not in stable storage yet (here the ZIL and the roch blog entry is excellent). That's it, i'm proposing the creation of a "matrix/table" with features and performance impact, as well as a comparison with other implementations/implications. Thanks very much for your time, and sorry for the long post.
Leal. This message posted from opensolaris.org
