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
>
|
