

Distributed Filesystems: Fraunhofer vs. Gluster (2014) - weitzj
http://moo.nac.uci.edu/~hjm/fhgfs_vs_gluster.html

======
dvirsky
> _" We tried Ceph about a year ago and it wasn’t nearly ready for production
> use"_

Given that it's a year-old article, that 2 year-old impression is probably
very outdated. I would have loved to see Ceph benchmarked there as well.

~~~
merb
The article is really outdated. There is no "FhGFS" anymore.

[http://www.beegfs.com/content/](http://www.beegfs.com/content/)

What i don't like are metadata servers. I mean mostly I would start out small,
with every project. But the "real" cluster file systems don't follow this
tradition. The bare minimum of a solid production environment is probably more
than 5 nodes, which is really huge for using it as a layer for content
distribution in the small scale.

I mean its cheaper to rent s3 / the new aws nfs solution or any other s3 like
storage solution, than running a server with a distributed file system by
yourself and I'm just considering the running costs, no maintance etc...

Its really hard to do this on premise on a really small scale and just for
availability. Most people will mostly just buy this stuff from san/nas vendors
if they could afford it, if they have a system that needs to have this built
in your pretty much fucked with ugly hacks / solutions.

~~~
true_religion
> I mean its cheaper to rent s3 / the new aws nfs solution or any other s3
> like storage solution

Sure if you never pay for bandwidth.

------
mbq
There is also little known but very cool MooseFS
[http://www.moosefs.org/](http://www.moosefs.org/)

~~~
Nux
Also [http://www.xtreemfs.org/](http://www.xtreemfs.org/)

------
bennyturns
> "Glfs has a severe problem with small writes, both with writing small files
> and small writes into large files. FhGFS does not have this bottleneck."

GlusterFS has implemented many smallfile performance enhancements and with the
latest release I am seeing a 20-50% improvement on smallfile performance.
There are more improvements in the pipeline:

[http://www.gluster.org/community/documentation/index.php/Fea...](http://www.gluster.org/community/documentation/index.php/Features/Feature_Smallfile_Perf)

I would be curious to see these tests run on a properly tuned(readahead on
bricks is important for spinning disks and read workloads, I didn't see any
mention of brick tuning in the article) and on the latest version of glusterfs
with the smallfile performance enhancements.

------
philchambers
Not sure if they've worked on it, but 3 years ago Gluster performance during
rebuild was about 1/100th of in normal operations making it effectively
impossible to do a rebuild of a production cluster if you lost a node.

------
tetron
Also Arvados Keep ([http://arvados.org](http://arvados.org)) is a content-
addressed distributed file system.

