Hi,
On a network capable of scp-ing files between machines at 60MB/sec, we are
only able to achieve 2-3MB/sec of throughput when using AFS. We've been
conducting tests on 300MB files, by copying them from the /afs/* mount to
the local filesystem with memcache enabled. In production, we will not be
On 8/31/2011 4:07 AM, Ken Elkabany wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On a network capable of scp-ing files between machines at 60MB/sec, we
> are only able to achieve 2-3MB/sec of throughput when using AFS. We've
> been conducting tests on 300MB files, by copying them from the /afs/*
> mount to the local filesyste
Hi,
I think some more detail on the network/network path would be helpful.
Regards,
Matt
- "Ken Elkabany" wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On a network capable of scp-ing files between machines at 60MB/sec, we
> are only able to achieve 2-3MB/sec of throughput when using AFS. We've
> been conducting
We're using 1.4.14 on the file servers (Ubuntu Natty) and 1.4.12 on the
clients (Ubuntu Lucid). We don't know many details about the network
topology as our servers are sitting on EC2, though as I stated previously,
our scp benchmarks are significantly faster.
The fileserver configuration is the d
Hi,
Well, others will have more to say about versions, but I imagine the
recommendation will be to have more modern servers and clients. Also, as you
suggest, the EC2 environment might very well put afs at a disadvantage, for
example, there might be NAT (though I have no real idea). It's not
