On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Matt Benjamin <[email protected]> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 > > Adding to that, I'd suggest reading the slides from Alistair Ferguson's > keynote at the 2008 AFS workshop. The current client/server ratio > (2000/1, going to 5000/1?) and configured callback's per file server (4 > million?) in one Morgan Stanley enviornment are mentioned, IIRC. >
It should be emphasized that their highest client/server ratios occur in what they call 'read-only' cells, which only contain read-only, not read-write data. Callbacks for those two different types of data are handled very differently (e.g., file level for read-write data vs volume level for read-only data); thus I suggest carefully benchmarking with actual access patterns to determine how far you want to scale. I would be further cautious taking numbers from that presentation and applying them elsewhere. Slide 20 points out they currently have 1.5K hosts per cell (750 per fileserver) now, and their goal is for OpenAFS to scale to handle 10K hosts per cell (5K per server) down the road. Those numbers are further muddled because they do not specify how many read-only copies are available total for data (or even if those ratios are for read-only or read-write cells), how (un)balanced access patterns are, how much headroom for growth those ratios include, hardware configurations, etc. Fileservers aside, and without knowing more about what Gary is trying to accomplish, the ~10 million user number is quite interesting. I do not know of any OpenAFS installation (or IBM AFS) installation that has tried to scale beyond 100K or so users. I know that we have done tests in a lab with very large numbers of users, but having that scale in production would likely present some new challenges. -- Steven Jenkins End Point Corporation http://www.endpoint.com/ _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
