[nycbug-talk] Approach for the NFS cluster

[Miles Nordin]

>>>>> "bc" == Brian Cully <bcully at gmail.com> writes:
>>>>> "hg" == H G <tekronis at gmail.com> writes:

    bc> Databases have already solved many of these problems
    bc> to the best they can be solved.

not so simple.  

First, my impression is, a common use of QFS (the Sun clustered FS
built over multi-initiator SCSI, usually FC-SW) is as backing store
for Oracle RAC.  DBMS and filesystem are not quite substitutable, but
rather parts of a storage stack.  Maybe big chunks of the lower stack
go unused when a database is running, but for now the whole stack is
generally still used.

Second, Oracle RAC is state-of-the-art for expensive databases, and it
does not scale anything close to linearly.  CouchDB, Hadoop, and the
next round of clustered filesystems, I've the impression, scale much
closer to linearly and might be far more interesting in the long run.

Third, you can use BDB as a backing-store (a ``storage brick'') for
GlusterFS.  I think the idea is, for tiny files, but not having
actually used it I am not sure if it really does make sense for
certain workloads, or if it's something they implemented as a toy.
But it is proof-of-concept: POSIX filesystem inside a database.  It
may be a pointless exercise, but I'm not sure it's difficult or
out-of-reach exercise.

    hg> anyone tried DragonBSD's HAMMER?

+1, also would like to know.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 304 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.nycbug.org:8443/pipermail/talk/attachments/20090519/57a0190f/attachment.bin>