[lug] Linux Cluster Hardware

[Chris M]

> From: Wayde Allen <wallen at boulder.nist.gov>
> Reply-To: lug at lug.boulder.co.us
> Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 13:18:16 -0600 (MDT)
> To: lug at lug.boulder.co.us
> Subject: Re: [lug] Linux Cluster Hardware
> 
> On Fri, 14 Jul 2000, Chris M wrote:
> 
>>> The only advantage to using network appliances appears to be when
>>> the vendor has really tweaked the hardware design to match the purpose
>>> of the system. 
>> 
>> Bzzt.  Thanks for playing Nate, tell him what he's won Bob.  Here's your
>> Rice a Roni.
>> 
>> You have really done the NetApp boxes a disservice by characterizing them
>> solely as an NFS replacement.  That's like calling Claudia Schiffer "not an
>> ugly goat."
> 
> Chris, these kinds of posts provide little to no information, and are
> quite simply uncalled for.  There is nothing wrong with disagreeing with
> someone, but at least explain why you disagree.

It was supposed to be humor. Sorry. Hopefully Nate was just saving
keystrokes, I've seen his posts before and he's smarter than that. I hope.

The post that I responded to did the same thing, no information.  And it
wasn't strictly Linux-related either. And you're picking on *me*?

Here's more info:

Nate said:
----
> Like any of the other "network appliances" out there that are replacing
> the old beloved big iron Unix machines doing the same chores, the price
> tag can look mighty steep on some of these boxes also... considering
> that if you set up a proper NFS server it'll do what the NetApp box does
> just fine.
---

Totally wrong.

An NFS server does NOT do what a NetApp box does "just fine", not even for
vanilla NFS.  About 3 seconds on the NetApp web site will tell you this,
spending 10's of $K will confirm it. NFS servers built on Linux don't let
you grow the store on the fly, they don't let you take snapshots of the
state of the disk in real time, they don't let you back up to where you were
in real time.  NFS is just a protocol, Linux is just an OS that can run it
with a filesystem that is extremely high-maintenance by comparison. NetApp
is a specially-tuned box that can talk NFS, it can talk to Windoze box on
the same network, it can keep track of where it was and get you back there,
the TCP stack is tuned for storage, etc.  We're not even going into the WAFL
filesystem or any of the other stuff.  There is no way the differences even
fit on a page.

If you think Linux as an NFS server is the same as a NetApp, well, then you
just spent $25K (minimum cost) for nothing and when your boss finds out
you're history.

A gigabit network card in a Linux NFS box is not going to have the
throughput of a NetApp.  The flexibility, the features, etc are all missing
too.

Chris