<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:gml="http://www.opengis.net/gml"
>

<channel>
	<title>LiquidFoot &#187; storage</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.liquidfoot.com/tag/storage/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.liquidfoot.com</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Apr 2010 16:36:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
		<item>
		<title>NFS Geek Out</title>
		<link>http://www.liquidfoot.com/2008/10/01/nfs-geek-out/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liquidfoot.com/2008/10/01/nfs-geek-out/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Oct 2008 23:23:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Wayne</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Computing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Projects]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[geek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nfs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[storage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liquidfoot.com/?p=112</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And that&#8217;s not Need for Speed <img src='http://www.liquidfoot.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>A while back I got a couple of Sun Thumpers (24TB each) to help out with our storage needs in the library. I&#8217;ve gotten to the point to deploy them. I have to admit I really dig the Solaris admin tools (web based ILOM) and the ZFS configuration tools.</p>
<p>The idea for the first Thumper is to make that the primary storage for of content for our institutional repository (we&#8217;re running DSpace). The last couple of days I&#8217;ve been getting down to a really geeky level in systems administration. I created an NFS share, but the question was on how to mount it. We use nfs3 in the integrated graphics labs to mount the high performance computing clusters, so I did this for DSpace and added an fstab entry</p>
<p>&lt;server&gt;:/dspace /dspace_nfs nfs rw,nosuid,hard,intr,rsize=32768,wsize=32768,tcp 0 0</p>
<p>I then ran some test to see what kind of throughput I could get.</p>
<p>time dd if=/dev/zero of=/dspace_nfs/dspace/testfile bs=16 count=16384</p>
<p>I got a result of</p>
<p>262144 bytes (262 kB) copied, 0.088866 seconds, 2.9 MB/s</p>
<p>Then, just to compare it against normal disk I/O, I did the same on the local hard drive</p>
<p>time dd if=dev/zero of=~/testfile bs=16 count=16384</p>
<p>This was quite a bit faster (as you probably would guess)</p>
<p>262144 bytes (262 kB) copied, 0.041865 seconds, 6.3 MB/s</p>
<p>To test the read speed, I took the same file and brought it back.</p>
<p>time dd if=/dspace_nfs/dspace/testfile of=/dev/null bs=16</p>
<p>On the NFS mount I got</p>
<p>262144 bytes (262 kB) copied, 0.017822 seconds, 14.7 MB/s</p>
<p>and on the local file system I got</p>
<p>262144 bytes (262 kB) copied, 0.015867 seconds, 16.5 MB/s</p>
<p>I was kind of surprised at how close the reads were. It&#8217;s not a huge file it&#8217;s moving (our larger files are around 350MB), but it&#8217;s reasonably consistence with an arbitrary file size of the PDFs we have in the collection.</p>
<p>I was corresponding with a colleague who&#8217;s been doing this way longer than I have and he suggested using a larger blocksize and writing/reading some files larger than the RAM size. I also wanted to test against NFS4 (I was using NFS3 in the fstab entry).</p>
<p>To do this, I just created a mount point and mounted the filesystem.</p>
<p>mkdir /mnt/nfs4<br />
mount -t nfs4 &lt;server&gt;:/dspace /mnt/nfs4</p>
<p>I ran the same test on the new mount and got a result of</p>
<p>262144 bytes (262 kB) copied, 0.055023 seconds, 4.8 MB/s</p>
<p>and for the read</p>
<p>262144 bytes (262 kB) copied, 0.014205 seconds, 18.5 MB/s</p>
<p>So, it looks like NFSv4 is much improved over NFSv3!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liquidfoot.com/2008/10/01/nfs-geek-out/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
