Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262949AbVALADf (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Jan 2005 19:03:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262943AbVAKXif (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Jan 2005 18:38:35 -0500 Received: from quechua.inka.de ([193.197.184.2]:1213 "EHLO mail.inka.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262925AbVAKXgm (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Jan 2005 18:36:42 -0500 From: Bernd Eckenfels To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Linux NFS vs NetApp Organization: Deban GNU/Linux Homesite In-Reply-To: <16868.19707.857446.864762@cse.unsw.edu.au> X-Newsgroups: ka.lists.linux.kernel User-Agent: tin/1.7.6-20040906 ("Baleshare") (UNIX) (Linux/2.6.8.1 (i686)) Message-Id: Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 00:36:40 +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 832 Lines: 21 In article <16868.19707.857446.864762@cse.unsw.edu.au> you wrote: >> NetApp's WAFL only journals metadata in NVRAM ... >> (one of the primary reasons its called WAFL is that the data-write only >> happens once..). > That may be, though it doesn't fit with my (admittedly limitted) > understanding of WAFL. Yes, AFAIK the NVRAM is used for the RAID-4, independend of WAFL and as a write-back cache. However since also the read performance of Linux NFS is bad (at least not very well selftuning) the Hardware is not really the reason for the fast NFS implementation. Greetings Bernd - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/