From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761824AbYENILM (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 May 2008 04:11:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753101AbYENIKr (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 May 2008 04:10:47 -0400 Received: from relay.2ka.mipt.ru ([194.85.82.65]:51909 "EHLO 2ka.mipt.ru" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758148AbYENIKo (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 May 2008 04:10:44 -0400 Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 12:10:29 +0400 From: Evgeniy Polyakov To: Florian Wiessner Cc: Jeff Garzik , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: POHMELFS high performance network filesystem. Transactions, failover, performance. Message-ID: <20080514081029.GA16134@2ka.mipt.ru> References: <20080513174523.GA1677@2ka.mipt.ru> <4829E752.8030104@garzik.org> <20080513205114.GA16489@2ka.mipt.ru> <20080514005223.GE27483@shareable.org> <482A3D88.2060105@netz-guru.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <482A3D88.2060105@netz-guru.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi. On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 03:16:56AM +0200, Florian Wiessner (ich@netz-guru.de) wrote: > I am currently working on mysqlfs which is a fuse fs which can be used > in conjunction with mysql-ndb cluster. > > You can find the details here: http://sourceforge.net/projects/mysqlfs/ > and a howto (in german, though) here: > http://www.netz-guru.de/2008/04/03/mysqlfs-mit-mysql-ndb-cluster-als-verteiltes-dateisystem/ > > It is working quite well, but still lacks of caching which makes it slow > if your connection between the DB-servers have high latency/many hops. Did FUSE start to make a fiendship with performance? Last time I saw it, they hated each other... Caching actually useful not only on slow, but also very fast links because of its ability to batch data and greatly reduce latencies of reply-request protocols, which in turn (for that protocols) greatly increases performance. If you are using async processing (like POHMELFS, iirc it is the only such approach in networked fs, cifs/smbfs and others wait after request is sent and only then proceed with the next one) that will allow to drain the cache very quickly and proceed with the next data set. -- Evgeniy Polyakov