Re: How git performs when you throw all of Debian at it
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 10:49:48PM +0200, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
> Steven Chamberlain <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > Wouldn't ZFS be a more natural way to do something like this?
> Possibly, but I have zero hopes of getting it set up and supported by
> DSA, so we can’t use it for this service.
Why do you say that when you haven't even asked?
Significant issues for DSA are:
- service owners saying "I need to unpack the entire archive and i need to
search it fast so get more hardware like SSDs" or equivalent without
understanding our constraints
- service owners not engaging with us early in their implementation to
understand what constraints we might need to impose or to sound us out on
architecture to improve performance or to reduce resource usage or to reduce
We are much more amenable to "how could I improve X so that it can run faster"
than we are to "zero hopes that DSA will support it". Disparaging us certainly
does not draw bees to honey, as they say.
To address this specific thread, the challenge with ZFS is not that we don't
like the idea (I'm keen on it, actually) but that it's not in the Linux kernel.
We prefer to use stock Debian kernels than custom-built kernels or modules for
our machines. If we can overcome these challenges for ZFS (which are
significant, I admit), we would be amenable to a discussion regarding ZFS
(although it isn't a great match to our current hardware configuration).
Is there another filesystem (or another approach) that would improve
performance? Are there other things we could consider (hdfs & solr, say)?
You know where we live,