Title: Re: [Sisuite-users] SystemImager and nfs-based image repositories?
With SystemImager 3.7.3, it supports 3 different transports: rsync, multicast (flamethrower) and bittorrent.  If rsync does not work well, perhaps you can try the other two with your NFS setup and see if it's any better.
 
Cheers,
 
Bernard


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Mark Seger
Sent: Sat 08/07/2006 12:40
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Sisuite-users] SystemImager and nfs-based image repositories?


>Message: 4
>Date: Sat, 8 Jul 2006 12:28:12 -0400
>From: Daniel Widyono <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: [Sisuite-users] SystemImager and nfs-based image
>       repositories?
>To: [email protected]
>Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>

>
>>point, though you'd need an nfs client.  but if you bypass rsync you'd
>>lose the cability of only installing pieces that changed.
>>   
>>
>
>You wouldn't need to, since whatever is changed is NFS mounted, so
>automatically seen by all nodes already.  This semi-diskless mode does not
>seem reasonable, though; I would not use sisuite for diskless management.

>
I'm not talking about diskless management.  The image server I use had
lots of disk space.  However, from a system management perspective, we
have an nfs server that feeds a number of our systems and gets backed
up, etc.  The question is really based on whether we can use that nfs
server to maintain the images.  The rest of the SI data structures like
/etc/systemimager/ would stay local to the image server.

>For what you are saying, I'm not sure I understand where the bottleneck is.
>It sounds like your NFS implementation is not feeding fast enough to handle
>several rsync's pulling data from the mount point.  That would not be
>something sisuite or any other application could help.  You could upgrade
>and/or tune the NFS connection.
>
The bottleneck seems to be rsync!  For example, do you know how in the
very beginning where it gets a list of all the files?  This takes almost
2 minutes when using an nfs-mounted /var/lib/systemimager.  I believe
the reason is that rsync has to do zillions of meta-data operations to
check individual file names, creation dates and sizes.  nfs sucks at
doing this type of thing and so I was hypothesizing that if one took
rsync out of the imaging equation if things might not perform better. 
It's really more of a thought experiment to better understand what
really happens and possibly to generate some new insights in how one
might improve the imaging process.

-mark




-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Sisuite-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sisuite-users

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Sisuite-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sisuite-users

Reply via email to