Re: Reiserfs with Samba vs NetApp Filer (purely performance)

["Ragnar Kjørstad" <reiserfs@ragnark.vestdata.no>]

On Sat, Dec 14, 2002 at 02:34:06PM -0800, Richard Sharpe wrote:
> If those are your choices, then I would rank them:
> 
>   NetApp F870, Linux with ReiserFS and Samba, Win2K
> 
> John Terpstra has done some testing with a modified cifs_bm which confirms 
> that Linux with EXT2/3 or ReiserFS outperforms Win2K on the same hardware.
> 
> However, my testing of the NetApp suggests it will outperform the other 
> two choices.

What kind of benchmarks, and what were the results?

> If you choose to use Samba, you will want to make sure that the sendfile 
> stuff is implemented. Unfortunately, the directory indexing in Reiser does 
> not help that much a lot of the time because Samba is forced to do 
> directory scans because it has to implement case-independent 
> lookups/searches.

Isn't that an configuration-option?

As a sidenote, I think it wouldn't be too hard to make reiserfs
optionally case-insensitive, but still able to use indexes. Perhaps it
would even be possible to have two virtual directories pr traditional
directory? one that has a regular index and one that has a
case-insensitive index. Of course this is not relevant for the
right-here right-now choice of fileservers, but....


-- 
Ragnar Kjørstad