3 ms·

Are there any distributed POSIX filesystems which don’t suck? I think part of the issue is that POSIX compliant filesystem just doesn’t scale, and you are just

Are there any distributed POSIX filesystems which don’t suck? I think part of the issue is that POSIX compliant filesystem just doesn’t scale, and you are just seeing that?

willbeddow 1y ago
weka seems to Just Work from our tests so far, even under pretty extreme load with hundreds of mounts on different machines, lots of small files, etc... Unfortunately it's ungodly expensive.
scheme271 1y ago
I think Lustre works fairly well. At the very least, it's used in a lot of HPC centers to handle large filesystems that get hammered by lots of nodes concurrently. It's open source so nominally free although getting a support contract from specialized consulting firm might be pricey.
- latchkey 1y ago
  https://www.reddit.com/r/AMD_Stock/comments/1nd078i/scaleup_and_scaleout_solved_before_mi400x_thanks/#lightbox https://www.reddit.com/r/AMD_Stock/comments/1nd078i/scaleup_... You're going to have to open the image and then go to the third image. I thought it was interesting that OCI pegs Lustre at 8Gb/s and their high performance FS at much higher than that... 20-80.
  - scheme271 1y ago
    That's 8Gb/s per TB of storage. The bandwidth is going to scale up as you add OSTs and OSSs. The OCI FS maxes at 80Gb/s per mount target.
huntaub 1y ago
Basically, we are building this at Archil (https://archil.com https://archil.com). The reason these things are generally super expensive is that it’s incredibly hard to build.