And do either of them perform better than fuse mounts ? With native nfs,
all data is routed through the server where it's mounted from, which makes
HA and load balancing difficult. For pNFS, there is a single metadata
server. How does that affect HA and load ? I thought one of the main goals
of gluster was decentralized metadata. Where do the four options (fuse,
native nfs, nfsv4, pnfs ) stand in terms of benefits and disadvantages ?
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Joe Julian <joe at julianfamily.org>
wrote:
> nfs-ganesha is a much more feature rich nfs server that uses libgfapi to
> access the gluster volume in userspace. This userspace solution avoids the
> context switches like the native gluster nfs does, but adds support for
> pnfs/nfsv4 and udp.
>
> From the development standpoint, they have a full set of developers
> working only on and focused only on their nfs server whereas the gluster
> version was implemented as a stop-gap to provide a solution where the
> kernel nfs re-share was failing.
>
> I think nfs-ganesha is a better solution. There is integration work being
> done in glusterfs to make its use seamless, so I suspect that's the
> long-term nfs solution that will eventually replace gluster's native
nfs.
>
>
> On 08/12/2015 09:54 AM, paf1 at email.cz wrote:
>
> Hello Dears,
>
> can anybody explain advanteges / disadvantages of Ganesha NFS ??
> Will U reccomend me go through this way ??
> ( 4 node glusterFS )
> regs.
> Pavel
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-users mailing listGluster-users at
gluster.orghttp://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users at gluster.org
> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20150812/effdbb80/attachment.html>