Re: wdfs vs sshfs vs the perfect fs

I tend to use sshfs when I need random access to it, and rsync over ssh when
using it for backups.  Any network filesystem is going to suck for DB type
access though.  NFS/iSCSI might be your best bet, but even those are not
going to be great over a WAN connection, and won't be supported by most
hosting accounts (especially iSCSI).

Matthew Bowie
Programmer/IT Consultant
[email protected]


On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 6:26 PM, Kelly Jones <[email protected]>wrote:

> I recently installed wdfs and sshfs on my FreeBSD server + mounted a
> filesystem under each.
>
> "df -k" and "tail -r" work great under sshfs.
>
> "df -k" doesn't work under wdfs (always shows 100% usage) and "tail
> -r" just hangs.
>
> sshfs also seems a little faster. Is all this normal?
>
> I figured webdav would handle "tail -r" better using HTTP's "Range"
> parameter, but I guess not. How does sshfs get to the end of a file so
> fast w/o doing a sequential read?
>
> What's the best way to mount a remote disk assuming I don't have root
> access on the target server? sshfs? wdfs? something else?
>
> I assume 'mount' is best if I do have root access.
>
> Specially interested in "random access" files like DBMs or
> MySQL/PostgreSQL files.
>
> Reason I ask: many hosting providers offer insane amounts of disk
> space for next to nothing, but they limit what you can do. By mounting
> the large disk, I can add virtual space to my more expensive dedicated
> server. It's slow, but useful when disk access speed is not an issue.
>
> --
> We're just a Bunch Of Regular Guys, a collective group that's trying
> to understand and assimilate technology. We feel that resistance to
> new ideas and technology is unwise and ultimately futile.
> _______________________________________________
> NMLUG mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.b9.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nmlug
>

_______________________________________________
NMLUG mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.b9.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nmlug