From: Rujia L. <ruj...@gm...> - 2012-04-18 02:25:43
|
I've already tried such a configuration in our company's LAN shortly after my post. We had only 3 chunkservers, but all of them used "filesystem in file". It's used primarily as the storage of Bacula (one backup per day, currently 50+GB written on mfs). 8 days have passed and so far so good :) 2012/4/18 Michał Borychowski <mic...@co...>: > Hi! > > We have not tried this in a production environment. In theory everything > should work fine. Please share your experience with our group after you run > this configuration. > > > Kind regards > Michał Borychowski > MooseFS Support Manager > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Rujia Liu [mailto:ruj...@gm...] > Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 9:49 AM > To: moo...@li... > Subject: [Moosefs-users] Drawbacks of using "filesystems in files" in chunk > servers? > > Hi all! > > In the reference guide, it is said "If it's not possible to create a > separate disk partition, filesystems in files can be used" and some > instrutions followed. I can imagine that there will be a drop down in the > performance (anyone has some statistical data about this?), but I don't know > whether there are other drawbacks. I'm asking this because I wanna make use > of some existing computers with partially empty partitions. I think It's a > bit risky to resize the partitions. > > Thanks! > > - Rujia > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > Better than sec? Nothing is better than sec when it comes to monitoring Big > Data applications. Try Boundary one-second resolution app monitoring today. > Free. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-dev2dev > _______________________________________________ > moosefs-users mailing list > moo...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/moosefs-users > |