[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: FSFS performance on NAS/NFS

From: Les Mikesell <lesmikesell_at_gmail.com>
Date: 2007-03-08 16:44:51 CET

Justin Johnson wrote:
> CollabNet said there wouldn't be any data integrity issues with
> NAS/NFS and FSFS as long as only one server was accessing the
> repository and the version of NFS supported locking. Mounting on
> multiple servers concurrently and load balancing would require a
> clustered file system.
> My question was specifically related to performance though. Is there
> anyone out there using FSFS repositories on NAS/NFS? Does the
> performance "really really really suck?" Should I go with Berkeley
> instead?

That's going to be up to the NAS and your client NFS implementation -
and maybe the amount of RAM on each. NetApp filers have always been
very usable with NFS for maildir mailboxes which do a lot of small file
access - but that's on the expensive side.

   Les Mikesell
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Mar 8 16:44:33 2007

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Users mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.