From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "William Knop" Subject: Re: status Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 12:34:00 -0500 Sender: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Return-path: To: NFS@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Ah, doesn't NFSv3 not support concurrent reads? Or concurrent reads while a file is open for writing or something like that? Concurrent writes would be useful, but is not necessarily required (we could hack around it). Idealy, we'd like to have a job continue to read off the version of a file it started reading on, such that when the file already opened for reading is opened for writing, the file is duplicated, the duplicate writen to (now the new version), then deleted once the initial job closes the file for reading. This could result in many versions of the same file, but only as long as they are open for reading. It would be nice if I could open a file for a "sustained read" or some such, so only big jobs would receive the special treatment of getting their own temporary version of a file. >NFSv4 for Linux is about three months out. a beta quality > > > client will be available soon, but the server is farther > > > out. > > > > > >what are your performance requirements, and why do you > > > think NFSv3 won't meet them? > > > > I'm setting up a distributed/clustering filesystem for a > > > > research group and > > > > would like some info/advise. > > > > > > > > > NFSv4 looks pretty sweet, but is it ready for beta > > > > deployment? We'll need to > > > > have everything up and stable >fairly soon, but so far it > > > seems like >NFSv4 is > > > > the only open source FS out there that will satisfy our > > > > requirements, of > > > > which the main ones are >partial-file caching and support for > > > large >(100GB+) > > > > filesystems. > > > > > > > > Intermezzo forces whole >file caching, which will not do. > > > >OpenGFS I believe > > > > is still in alpha stage. OpenAFS only allows for very >small > > > filesystems. > > > > EVMS looks >promising, but the clustering FS part is still > > > > alpha. I think > > > > NFSv3 has poor performance, although it would be >excellent if > > > it would work. > > > > > > > > > I'd greatly appreciate any info on distributed/clustering > > > > filesystems, > > > > especially NFSv4 or stable >alternatives. > > > Thanks much, > > William Knop _________________________________________________________________ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: To learn the basics of securing your web site with SSL, click here to get a FREE TRIAL of a Thawte Server Certificate: http://www.gothawte.com/rd524.html _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs