A couple of weeks ago I asked for comments from sites using eNFS/Cache from
Interstream Inc, I didn't receive many replies but here is what I did get.
I haven't included the straightforward "me-toos". I've put some contact
information etc at the end. Thanks to all who replied.
Paul Quare
Original posting
----------------
>There is a product eNFS/Cache from Interstream which will cache read side
>NFS requests on a local disc. We have recently upgraded many of our clients
>to have a small (105M) disc for root/swap and a small amount of software.
>eNFS/Cache looks to be a useful product in that it doesn't require any
>intervention by the system adminstrator in terms of decisions about what to
>cache (real usage dictates that) and removes the possible need to alter the
>filestore layout to reflect what you might decide to store on the local disc
>rather than access via NFS.We have obtained an evaluation copy from Interstream
>and it seems to perform without any problems,(on a single machine).
>
>Is there anyone who is using this product in a large network who can comment
>on its performance/reliability etc. I will summarise to these newsgroups if
>you email me. I understand that Sun may have a similar product in a release of
>Solaris2.1 for later next year,one of the factors affecting whether we purchase
>will be the date at which we upgrade these machines (in teaching laboratories)
>from SunOS4.1.X to Solaris2.X,we have a limited budget!
>
>Paul Quare
>pq@cs.man.ac.uk
--------------------------------
From: petsche@hawk.siemens.com (Thomas Petsche)
PLEASE forward any information you get about eNFS/cache. I asked
about this a while ago and didn't get any feedback (other than
this sort of note asking a copy of information).
BTW, the announcement I saw about enhanced NFS from Sun said that
some of the enhancements would be available next year, but I don't
think local caching was one of them. If you have more solid
information, I appreciate it.
Thanks!
Tom
[[See [1] below]]
----------------------------------
From: David Barr <barr@pop.psu.edu>
I'd be very interested in the results of your summary. I'm
currently evaluating AFS, which also has a local cache. You might
also want to check out IFS, which is an extension to AFS. Send mail
to info@citi.umich.edu. I've looked at eNFS briefly, but haven't the
guts to try out the demo yet.
--Dave
-- System Administrator, Population Research Institute barr@pop.psu.edu loose: v. to set free, or adj. not securely fastened. lose: v. to miss from one's possession.[[see [2] below]]
--------------------------------------- From: sdi@sun-valley.Stanford.EDU (Steven D. Ims)
Paul,
We also evaluated the eNFS/Cache product. Our network is about 16 machines (SS1, IPC, and SS2) with a Sun4/370 server (SCSI disks) and clients. The typical load for our server during the day is about 2.5 to 3.
We didn't see much noticeable improvement in performance due to the eNFS/Cache, but we attribute that to the following: (1) relatively low load on the server and (2) access time on the client disks and the server disks are comparable.
However, I would expect that if the server load were higher or the clients' disks faster, then eNFS could make a noticeable impact.
I'd be interested to read a summary of the responses that you get about this product. Thanks.
-- Steve sdi@sun-valley.stanford.edu
[[see [3] below]] ---------------------------------------- From: Barry Margolin <barmar@Think.COM>
We had some problems that may have been a result of eNFS/Cache. Some of the clients using it were getting corrupted data. -- Barry Margolin System Manager, Thinking Machines Corp.
barmar@think.com {uunet,harvard}!think!barmar
[[I didn't see anthing of this nature,I was using version 1.0.1, I used it to compile X11R5 a couple of times and had no problems with that.]] ---------------------------- From: David_Boyd@sparky.IMD.Sterling.COM (David Boyd)
In article <6515@m1.cs.man.ac.uk> you write: >Is there anyone who is using this product in a large network who can comment >on its performance/reliability etc. I will summarise to these newsgroups if >you email me. I understand that Sun may have a similar product in a release of >Solaris2.1 for later next year,one of the factors affecting whether we purchase >will be the date at which we upgrade these machines (in teaching laboratories) >from SunOS4.1.X to Solaris2.X,we have a limited budget! > Although we are not using it on a large network we have done some evaluations of its effect on network load. The first thing we noticed is that if the response time from the server is fast you acually suffer a small performance penalty. When reading lots and lots of image data over the network I found it could reduce actual transfers by quite a signigicant amount.
Now, a question. Where did you here that Sun may be introducing a similar product? This is the first we have heard about it. What is the projected availability and cost if you know. Thanks. -- David W. Boyd UUCP: uunet!sparky!dwb Sterling Software IMD INTERNET: dwb@IMD.Sterling.COM 1404 Ft. Crook Rd. South Phone: (402) 291-8300 Bellevue, NE. 68005-2969 FAX: (402) 291-4362
-------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike_Wertzberger@sparky.IMD.Sterling.COM (Mike Wertzberger)
I have eNFS/Cache. I found it to reduce my network load in a local area network by 40%.. My current configuration is a SUN630MPx2 server with SUN SPARC 2 clients. I have configured my clients with a 100 MB cache directory. My intent is to migrate this all to a very wide area and see what happens.
I can only say good things about Interstream, I found them to be very responsive to questions, and open to ideas for future technology.
The current products from sun I dont think do the same type of work, they do a NFS write accelleration, and that is not a lot of help for my situation. -- Mike Wertzberger UUCP: uunet!sparky!wertz Sterling Software IMD INTERNET: wertz@IMD.Sterling.COM 1404 Ft. Crook Rd. South Phone: (402) 291-8300 Bellevue, NE. 68005-2969 FAX: (402) 291-4362
[[ I feel that there are several products addressing different aspects of the "problem" eNFS & Prestoserve for NFS writes, Interphase boards for network throughput, eNFS/Cache for client side read performance.]] ------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------- Notes ----- [1] Sun caching filesystems. I can only pass on what I was told as unattributable/unsubstantiated rumour: Sun may provide a caching filesystem in Solaris2.2 or 2.3. - I heard that it might be in the 4/93 release.(Nothing was mentioned about 4.1.X systems). Perhaps Sun will disclose something amongst their Nov 10 revelations.
[2] IFS/AFS Re IFS: "Many of our technical reports are available online via AFS or anonymous ftp to citi.umich.edu in /afs/umich.edu/group/itd/citi/public/techreports. We also have an IFS Overview document available in postscript via the same access methods but in /afs/umich.edu/group/itd/citi/public/ifs" Re AFS: This is marketed by Transarc: afs-sales@transarc.com Tel: 412-338-4432
[3] Performance As I only installed it on one client I found it hard to extrapolate what the overall performance on our network would be. It is reasonable to assume that a fast NFS server would respond quicker than a client's local disc for one client but what would N clients produce in throughput?? Generally I observed things going slower as the cache was loaded and then varying speed changes but accompanied by a fall in network packets.It was quite easy to construct tests like doing a sum on the files within an NFS mounted filesystem that showed things in a favourable light!
------------------------
Interstream contacts Interstream Inc, 1501 Reedsdale Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15223-2329 Tel: 412-323-8000 Fax: 412-323-1930 slf%interstream.com@netserver.andrew.cmu.edu (Stacy Fuechslin International Account Representative) bjd%interstream.com@netserver.andrew.cmu.edu (Bruce DaCosta President/CEO)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Sep 28 2001 - 23:06:52 CDT