nas /cloud server 推荐 - 未名空间MITBBS历史存档

国际科技财经博客移民网络热点娱乐民生时事公众号

Redian新闻

>未名空间

>Hardware - 计算机硬件

nas /cloud server 推荐

nas /cloud server 推荐# Hardware - 计算机硬件

d*e2013-04-24 07:04

1 楼

正在装一个小cluster做计算，像弄一个NAS server,现在有几个选择，不知道怎么样比
较合适？
1. 用synology,好处是比较方便，坏处是速度快的比较贵
2. 在linux上设置NFS server,等，再装一个owncloud来提供cloud服务，但是好像
owncloud速度很慢？
3. cloudstack/openstack这个好像比较复杂，有人知道能用吗？

l*k2013-04-24 07:04

2 楼

owncloud:
https://github.com/owncloud/mirall/issues/331
"So basically the slow syncing originates from:
1) The PUT of the file: 158K in 1.6s
2) Setting LastModified: 1.65s
3) Owncloud_stat: 0.7s
Thus a total processing time of around 4s."
注意这是每一个文件的overhead，4秒...
"i am synching a 19 mb folder with savegames right now, but it takes like 1
hour to sync ... which makes it unusable .."
"1- 780 MB, only a few folders, took around 10 mins over FTTH
2- 900 MB, lots of small files, thumbs, more than 4 days later still data
missing."
"In my last test, client 1.2.5 works the same, 900 MB, 20 K files, several
weeks to sync. "
OC的开发人员对这个问题的回复：
"seems the developers are too busy with another non critic trouble". Aha,
like what? Fixing crashes? Avoiding dataloss? Is that "non-critic" (sic!).
Anyway, the issue is pretty simple: the clients upload one file at a time,
so the time penalty is the highest for lots of small files, due to roundtrip
losses. Others at least went ahead to propose fixes (i.e. #548), and any
proposal we have needs a bit of design and implementation. Right now we are
working on chunked uploading to optimize upload of big files. And after that
, we will come to this use case. But being only two developers (that also
have to do all the support, resolving bugs, etc), we have to chew the cake
piece by piece.
看这个态度，完全没把巨大的overhead开销当回事。

【在 d*******e 的大作中提到】

: 正在装一个小cluster做计算，像弄一个NAS server,现在有几个选择，不知道怎么样比
: 较合适？
: 1. 用synology,好处是比较方便，坏处是速度快的比较贵
: 2. 在linux上设置NFS server,等，再装一个owncloud来提供cloud服务，但是好像
: owncloud速度很慢？
: 3. cloudstack/openstack这个好像比较复杂，有人知道能用吗？