HI I agree with you somehow. And there seems no other options now also.
NFS worry is if storage fail , then affect many. it is single point of failure, and the effect may be bigger the localstorage, except doing DRDB kind of thing which is back to years ago thing. On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 11:58 AM Ivan Kudryavtsev <i...@bw-sw.com> wrote: > Hi Hean, > > I've never tried pNFS, but the problem is the same. If you want failover > and hyper scaling, then use Gluster or Ceph. Why would you use PNFS which > is used by almost nobody? > People use NFS because: > > 1. it's primitive > 2. it's easy to manage > 3. it supports migrations > 4. if planned well (cluster-wide) you can limit fail domain. > 5. it is rock solid If deployed properly (i had my NFS 600+ days of > uptime). > > If you want fault-tolerance, use Gluster, Ceph, or proprietary, don't > reinvent the wheel. > > I don't use NFS because my goal is to limit the failure domain to a single > host, so I use local storage. Every server is packed with SSD RAID or NVME > RAID, for me offline migrations are just fine. A bunch of my users wants > fault tolerance, so they use pretty tiny Gluster (1TB). > > You will never get great IOPS on any parallel, clustered FS or storage. > Want best performance - use NFS or local, want failover use Gluster (shared > mount point) or Ceph (natively supported). > > -- > Ivan > > > > > On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 11:59 PM Hean Seng <heans...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > HI > > > > Since the most of user using NFS for cloudstack, can I ask if cloudstack > > NFS mount can support which version of NFS. > > > > I just a test and seems is v4. and there is no way to on 4.1 which > > support PNFS etc . > > > > Anybody can advice on this ? > > > > Thanks > > > > > > -- > > Regards, > > Hean Seng > > > -- Regards, Hean Seng
