Menu
▾
▴
Re: [Moosefs-users] geographical fun with MooseFS
|
From: i- <it...@it...> - 2011-07-07 15:08:15
|
Big up for this feature ! This REALLY is interresting. Le 07/07/2011 15:36, Roger Skjetlein a écrit : > How will this rack maps implemention be? Is is rack de-centric or > co-centric? > > RS > > On 6/30/11 10:24 AM, Michal Borychowski wrote: >> Hi! >> >> This could be quite difficult to keep "distances" in IP addresses. We >> introduced rack maps which should be easier in the mainenance. It would be >> soon available in the public version. >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mike [mailto:isp...@gm...] >> Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2011 5:02 AM >> To: moo...@li... >> Subject: [Moosefs-users] geographical fun with MooseFS >> >> >> What if someone wrote a patch for MooseFS that looked at the IP of the >> client, and the IP of the chunk servers that had the chunk the client >> wanted, and tried to pick the closest one? >> >> something like >> >> client = 10.1.1.1 >> chunkserver with copy#1 = 10.1.1.2 >> chunkserver with copy#2 = 10.1.1.20 >> chunkserver with copy#3 = 10.1.2.2 >> >> Those 3 chunk servers would be used in that order, since their IPs are >> closer to the client's IP (using a formula like a*256^3+b*256^2+c*256+d >> to calculate an integer? long int? based on an IP address). >> >> This way you could have "close" chunk servers respond to most of the >> requests from a client, but if no "close" server had the chunk you >> wanted, you could go to a "distant" one. >> >> Drop two IPs on the client's interface, and do some careful numbering, >> and you can even set preference on a machine on the same LAN. >> >> This might make for a really simple way to do "distant" archives that >> don't get used for reads unless they are the only source that's >> available, and other similar problems. >> >> writes would be a different problem. >> >> Thoughts? comments? |
