trafficserver-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net>
Subject Re: ATS Storage Question
Date Fri, 18 Oct 2013 17:07:35 GMT
Am 18.10.2013 18:40, schrieb Adam W. Dace:
> Yeah, I'm not trying to debate that filesystem is faster than raw disk.  It's just not
really an option for me.
> Heck, one of the caches I'm running is completely virtualized. Sorry, no raw disk there

uhm?

[root@proxy:~]$ cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep hypervisor
flags: fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts
acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2
ss syscall nx rdtscp lm constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts nopl xtopology tsc_reliable nonstop_tsc
aperfmperf pni
pclmulqdq ssse3 cx16 sse4_1 sse4_2 popcnt aes hypervisor lahf_lm ida arat epb pln pts dtherm

hypervisor = VMware vSphere 5 guest

our whole infrastructure is 100% virtualized including the ATS machine
but i see no reason why you can't avoid the guest-FS and assign the
virtual disk dedicated to ATS

in case of virtualization it is even more important to avoid the
additional filesystem layer because there are enough layers with
latency (guest, host, SAN)





Mime
View raw message