Mailing List Archive: Cherokee: users

Distributed file system with Cherokee

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

pubcrawler.com at gmail

Oct 28, 2009, 9:18 PM

Post #1 of 9 (91 views)
Permalink

Distributed file system with Cherokee

Anyone here in Cherokee land using a distributed filesystem with
Cherokee? Something out there folks recommend?

Looking for something with redundancy and distributed disk. A shared
single volume is our weak link, bottleneck and long term issue.

Thanks!
-Paul
_______________________________________________
Cherokee mailing list
Cherokee[at]lists.octality.com
http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee

stefan at konink

Oct 28, 2009, 9:22 PM

Post #2 of 9 (88 views)
Permalink

Re: Distributed file system with Cherokee [In reply to]

On Thu, 29 Oct 2009, pub crawler wrote:

> Anyone here in Cherokee land using a distributed filesystem with
> Cherokee? Something out there folks recommend?
>
> Looking for something with redundancy and distributed disk. A shared
> single volume is our weak link, bottleneck and long term issue.

Do you want to write to it too? (aka shared sessions etc?)

Stefan

_______________________________________________
Cherokee mailing list
Cherokee[at]lists.octality.com
http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee

pubcrawler.com at gmail

Oct 28, 2009, 9:26 PM

Post #3 of 9 (88 views)
Permalink

Re: Distributed file system with Cherokee [In reply to]

Yes, writing to the shared disk would be nice. Shared sessions, yes.

We have user uploads - graphic files - which need centralized and made
highly redundant like this.

-Paul
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 12:22 AM, Stefan de Konink <stefan[at]konink.de> wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Oct 2009, pub crawler wrote:
>
>> Anyone here in Cherokee land using a distributed filesystem with
>> Cherokee? Something out there folks recommend?
>>
>> Looking for something with redundancy and distributed disk. A shared
>> single volume is our weak link, bottleneck and long term issue.
>
> Do you want to write to it too? (aka shared sessions etc?)
>
>
> Stefan
>
>
_______________________________________________
Cherokee mailing list
Cherokee[at]lists.octality.com
http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee

stefan at konink

Oct 28, 2009, 9:28 PM

Post #4 of 9 (88 views)
Permalink

Re: Distributed file system with Cherokee [In reply to]

On Thu, 29 Oct 2009, pub crawler wrote:

> Yes, writing to the shared disk would be nice. Shared sessions, yes.
>
> We have user uploads - graphic files - which need centralized and made
> highly redundant like this.

HashIP to prevent sucking locks, and I would give Lustre or GFS try,
depending on the size.

Stefan

_______________________________________________
Cherokee mailing list
Cherokee[at]lists.octality.com
http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee

pubcrawler.com at gmail

Oct 28, 2009, 9:36 PM

Post #5 of 9 (88 views)
Permalink

Re: Distributed file system with Cherokee [In reply to]

Great stuff Stefan, as usual.

Any idea of which package you would implement? Looking for quick
implementation and something that mostly works post install with
minimal adjustment (initially)... I am short on time currently. Lustre
keeps coming around and reminding me to try it, but looks daunting and
time intensive to rollout.

-Paul

On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 12:28 AM, Stefan de Konink <stefan[at]konink.de> wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Oct 2009, pub crawler wrote:
>
>> Yes, writing to the shared disk would be nice. � �Shared sessions, yes.
>>
>> We have user uploads - graphic files - which need centralized and made
>> highly redundant like this.
>
> HashIP to prevent sucking locks, and I would give Lustre or GFS �try,
> depending on the size.
>
>
> Stefan
>
>
_______________________________________________
Cherokee mailing list
Cherokee[at]lists.octality.com
http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee

stefan at konink

Oct 28, 2009, 9:49 PM

Post #6 of 9 (88 views)
Permalink

Re: Distributed file system with Cherokee [In reply to]

On Thu, 29 Oct 2009, pub crawler wrote:

> Great stuff Stefan, as usual.
>
> Any idea of which package you would implement? Looking for quick
> implementation and something that mostly works post install with
> minimal adjustment (initially)... I am short on time currently. Lustre
> keeps coming around and reminding me to try it, but looks daunting and
> time intensive to rollout.

That is exactly the point; the keep it simple stupid would be NFS
ofcourse. Trying to implement something redundant always requires an
investment. I mean: what if it breaks...

For example; I currently prefer ZFS for virtually anything storage
related, the out of the box install works, but if it breaks... who is
going to help? Better set it up yourself play with it... and then deploy
after a good test.

Stefan

_______________________________________________
Cherokee mailing list
Cherokee[at]lists.octality.com
http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee

pubcrawler.com at gmail

Oct 28, 2009, 9:58 PM

Post #7 of 9 (89 views)
Permalink

Re: Distributed file system with Cherokee [In reply to]

> That is exactly the point; the keep it simple stupid would be NFS
> ofcourse. Trying to implement something redundant always requires an
> investment. I mean: what if it breaks...
>
> For example; I currently prefer ZFS for virtually anything storage
> related, the out of the box install works, but if it breaks... who is
> going to help? Better set it up yourself play with it... and then deploy
> after a good test.
>

Oh I plan on learning the intimate details of whatever I deploy. Just
don't want to do that upfront per se right now. Many of these sorts
of packages can eat up months of time with no working results. Lots
of packages aren't as simple and user intuitive as Cherokee :) We can
wish though.
_______________________________________________
Cherokee mailing list
Cherokee[at]lists.octality.com
http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee

stefan at konink

Oct 28, 2009, 10:02 PM

Post #8 of 9 (88 views)
Permalink

Re: Distributed file system with Cherokee [In reply to]

On Thu, 29 Oct 2009, pub crawler wrote:

> > That is exactly the point; the keep it simple stupid would be NFS
> > ofcourse. Trying to implement something redundant always requires an
> > investment. I mean: what if it breaks...
> >
> > For example; I currently prefer ZFS for virtually anything storage
> > related, the out of the box install works, but if it breaks... who is
> > going to help? Better set it up yourself play with it... and then deploy
> > after a good test.
> >
>
> Oh I plan on learning the intimate details of whatever I deploy. Just
> don't want to do that upfront per se right now. Many of these sorts
> of packages can eat up months of time with no working results. Lots
> of packages aren't as simple and user intuitive as Cherokee :) We can
> wish though.

Indeed; a Cherokee style click-press-run distributed hosting could be
great. A good design is a start.

Stefan

_______________________________________________
Cherokee mailing list
Cherokee[at]lists.octality.com
http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee

n.bochev at grandstarco

Nov 4, 2009, 12:57 PM

Post #9 of 9 (61 views)
Permalink

Re: Distributed file system with Cherokee [In reply to]

You could try GlusterFS, depending on your load and files number it might work or not :)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Stefan de Konink" <stefan[at]konink.de>
To: "pub crawler" <pubcrawler.com[at]gmail.com>
Cc: "Cherokee Mailing List" <cherokee[at]cherokee-project.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 7:02:06 AM
Subject: Re: [Cherokee] Distributed file system with Cherokee

On Thu, 29 Oct 2009, pub crawler wrote:

> > That is exactly the point; the keep it simple stupid would be NFS
> > ofcourse. Trying to implement something redundant always requires an
> > investment. I mean: what if it breaks...
> >
> > For example; I currently prefer ZFS for virtually anything storage
> > related, the out of the box install works, but if it breaks... who is
> > going to help? Better set it up yourself play with it... and then deploy
> > after a good test.
> >
>
> Oh I plan on learning the intimate details of whatever I deploy. Just
> don't want to do that upfront per se right now. Many of these sorts
> of packages can eat up months of time with no working results. Lots
> of packages aren't as simple and user intuitive as Cherokee :) We can
> wish though.

Indeed; a Cherokee style click-press-run distributed hosting could be
great. A good design is a start.

Stefan

_______________________________________________
Cherokee mailing list
Cherokee[at]lists.octality.com
http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee
_______________________________________________
Cherokee mailing list
Cherokee[at]lists.octality.com
http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact lists@gossamer-threads.com