Chris Siebenmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | Speaking as a sysadmin (and a Sun customer), why on earth would I have | to provision 8 GB+ of RAM on my NFS fileservers? I would much rather | have that memory in the NFS client machines, where it can actually be | put to work by user programs. | | (If I have decently provisioned NFS client machines, I don't expect much | from the NFS fileserver's cache. Given that the clients have caches too, | I believe that the server's cache will mostly be hit for things that the | clients cannot cache because of NFS semantics, like NFS GETATTR requests | for revalidation and the like.)
That's certainly true for the NFS part of the NFS fileserver, but to get the ZFS feature-set, you trade off cycles and memory. If we investigate this a bit, we should be able to figure out a rule of thumb for how little memory we need for an NFS->home-directories workload without cutting into performance. --dave -- David Collier-Brown | Always do right. This will gratify Sun Microsystems, Toronto | some people and astonish the rest [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Mark Twain (905) 943-1983, cell: (647) 833-9377, (800) 555-9786 x56583 bridge: (877) 385-4099 code: 506 9191# _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
