[fedora-arm] Who's using Kirkwood?

[Gordan Bobic]

On 10/12/2012 09:55 AM, Yanko Kaneti wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-10-12 at 09:40 +0100, Gordan Bobic wrote:
>> ....
>> I use iSCSI (ext4 build area on one of the hosts for the packages that
>> fail self-tests on NFS) and NFS (for everything else) backed by a
>> reasonably beefy storage box.
>
> Why no just iSCSI ? I am guessing you have some numbers to compare as
> you usually do.

I haven't tested it, but I wouldn't expect much difference. NFS is 
pretty efficient, and it's designed for that specific mode of operation. 
If anything I'd expect it to be faster than iSCSI.

But the main reason I use it is because having shared storage is 
convenient for a lot of reasons.

> And what about kirkwoods with sata + average-speed spinning hd
> vs NFS/ext4 over iSCSI.on a gigabit.

That would require a separate disk per builder, it'd still need some 
shared storage for convenience, and the IOPS would never be as good as 
what you can provide with a bigger storage box on the network. For 
example, my storage box (shared, not dedicated to the build farm) has 
13x1TB disks in ZFS RAIDZ2 (using ZoL) and 16GB of RAM. It seamlessly 
churns out several times more IOPS than my small build farm can consume, 
even during the I/O intensive operations such as extracting src.rpms, 
and cleaning up build space.

For cleanup, iSCSI+ext4 might be faster, but ultimately I don't 
particularly want to have to buy more disks. Having them all in one box 
is convenient and plenty fast enough.

Gordan