What is the maximum number of NFS mounts per client? I have an instance where there are over 400 mount points using autofs. I was wondering if there is a downside to that.
On 11/17/2013 08:58 PM, Rita wrote:
What is the maximum number of NFS mounts per client? I have an instance where there are over 400 mount points using autofs. I was wondering if there is a downside to that.
Except the network load, I think you'll just have the same issues you basically encounter with NFS. But, may be if you feed with actual problems...
For curiosity: What's the use case of having 400 NFS mounts? Are you using TCP? UDP?
Thanks for the response.
I am using TCP mounts. The reason for 400 mounts is because we have several hundred storage servers and use automount to mount them up. The data is scattered all over the place thus the extremely large mounts.
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 1:50 AM, Mihamina RKTMB mihamina@rktmb.org wrote:
On 11/17/2013 08:58 PM, Rita wrote:
What is the maximum number of NFS mounts per client? I have an instance where there are over 400 mount points using autofs. I was wondering if there is a downside to that.
Except the network load, I think you'll just have the same issues you basically encounter with NFS. But, may be if you feed with actual problems...
For curiosity: What's the use case of having 400 NFS mounts? Are you using TCP? UDP?
-- +261 34 81 738 69
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Rita wrote:
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 1:50 AM, Mihamina RKTMB mihamina@rktmb.org wrote:
On 11/17/2013 08:58 PM, Rita wrote:
What is the maximum number of NFS mounts per client? I have an instance where there are over 400 mount points using autofs. I was
wondering if
there is a downside to that.
Except the network load, I think you'll just have the same issues you basically encounter with NFS. But, may be if you feed with actual
problems...
For curiosity: What's the use case of having 400 NFS mounts? Are you using TCP? UDP?
Thanks for the response.
I am using TCP mounts. The reason for 400 mounts is because we have several hundred storage servers and use automount to mount them up. The
data is
scattered all over the place thus the extremely large mounts.
May I ask how *big* all those storage servers are? If you're not talking tens of terabytes or more, you might consider a honkin' big RAID box, with one or two servers controlling it and serving (and maybe even 10GB pipes; gigabit pipes at a bare-bones minimum. It'd use a lot less energy, cost less, and be lower maintenance.
For example, AC&NC sells one, holds 42 2TB drives, and cost just over $32k.
mark "can't *imagine* how I'd know that...."*
* No, I don't work for them. Like the product.
-
m.roth＠5-cent.us -
Mihamina RKTMB -
Rita