Re: nfs mounted web dierstories?

To: lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: nfs mounted web dierstories?
From: Alois Treindl <alois@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 09:21:14 +0200 (METDST)
On 27 Apr 2001, Doug Elznic wrote:

> Hello,
> I am having some trouble getting my developers to get used to ftping
> their files twice to get the two real servers in sync. How are other
> people keeping their server in sync. And what are the performance
> implications for doing it your way? I have thought more about nfs lately
> but I am afraid that the nfs server will create a  bottlneck. And I know
> very little about coda's stability/performance. I saw the old survey but
> it was not very indepth about this.

It depends on your network load.
If your NFS server is connected via 100 mbit Ethernet, but your
Internet used bandwidth is significantly below that, it is unlikely
that NFS is a bootleneck. The NFS data volume will be of the same
order of magnitude as the volume your http servers serve collectively
to the Internet.

Adding lots of RAM to each real server will help, because all frequent
files will be buffered in RAM and create no NFS traffic.

I am planning to NFS mount all web docs and cgi directories
for a set of 4 real servers.

If you decide to keep the web content local on each server,
use rsync to keep it synchronized.
It is higly efficient and convenient.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>