Clint Bullock writes: > I've been using a NetApp F720 with linux and freebsd NFS clients for almost two > years, and I have had 0% NFS failure. I've been very happy mounting my maildirs > over NFS. Where are your failure statistics? Please provide us with a > cost/performance/stability evaluation of other solutions you have implemented, > as well.
0% NFS box failure doesn't mean 0% application failure which thinks NFS share is a regular FS. You're all mentioning the same vendor, and how great their implementation is. Blah Blah. Just the fact that you had to spend $20,000 on A PC with RAID and proprietary OS says something about most NFS implementations, and the its design doesn't it? Who told you that you have to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on a redundant SAN and software? In the case of GFS it doesn't cost anything, and even source is available. You only pay for hardware. It would probably cost you much less than your filer, and provide better performance since network is not involved, only SCSI fiber. I have been fortunate not to run NFS, but it's a major PITA for many sysadmins. I don't have to tell you that. I see NFS-related problems every day on many mailing lists. And they're not Linux-specific. Enough said.
