Sun, or Linux 2.4.x As An NFS Server?

Quixote asks: "Time was, that the only choice for a stable, interoperable NFS server was a Sun box. Now, things seem to be changing. Linux Kernel 2.4.2 is out, and with this come more choices. If I'm putting together a central NFS fileserver to serve a moderate amount of space (say 200GB) to a mainly Sun/Solaris clientele; should I go with a Sun box with a A1000 h/w RAID (at 3x-5x the cost of the other choice), or should I look at Linux with kernel 2.4.x + a journalling filesystem like ReiserFS/XFS/JFS, built on top of a dual-processor P-III with 2GB memory, a Mylex RAID controller and a Gbit NIC?" Are the issues which were raised in last discussion on NFS and Free OSes still a concern? Are there any Linux 2.4 NFS boxes out in production anywhere, and if so, how have they been holding up?

Comments

Re:AFS

[Wakko Warner]

This is why you use IP addresses in /etc/exports.

- A.P.

--
* CmdrTaco is an idiot.

Re:Look seriously at a BSD

[Matthew Weigel]

Just for posterity, I'll respond: locking is a problem for the BSDs , not server-side.

Linux NFS and comparing Apples to Apples...

[trims]

I actually have no problems with Linux NFS v3. Unfortunately, I'm not using one of the journaling FS (xfs/reiserf/ext3), and I have a couple of friends who have had problems with using the jFSes in combo with NFS3. I wouldn't consider it prime-time on Linux yet.

I have no experience with *BSD and NFS3, so I can't comment there.

A couple things to remember when looking at the hardware:

• Are you comparing Apples to Apples? By this I mean that your Sun system is probably something like a Netra T1 AC200 and a A1000 array (which would list for about $20k together), but is your PC system equivalent? By that I mean it had better be compared to a IBM xSeries 230 w/ external drive cage or a Compaq DL380 and drive rack, not Joe Schmoe's Local Linux Special.
• Have you factored in Support Costs? If you're a totally Sun shop, saving a couple of grand on a PC system isn't worth the extra hassle managing the vendor relationship for that one PC. If you're a mixed shop, I would only consider getting the PC from the company who makes the majority of your PC servers. Support is a big issue.
• Compare warrantees. Assuming your doing a production environment, do all the hardware systems come with a warranty that means your exacting requirements? If not, can you get an uplifted warranty (and what does that cost?)
• And lastly, what about your in-house expertise? Don't just think of yourself, because you might get sick / hit by a bus / quit and move to another job. The company needs to be able to competently manage the system for at least 3 years. Can they expect to do that with a reasonable turnover in the current employee base?

Good luck. Honestly, I'd investigate the *BSD solution for now, but I'd keep in mind that the upfront costs of the Sun system may actually be smaller than the long-term costs of the PCs.

-Erik

What about Solaris x86?

[Techno_Jesus]

Here is a partial suggestion and question.

What about Solaris x86? I know BSD has been mentioned, which has excellent NFS support, and uses PeeCee hardware. But since you say it is a mostly sun network, sol x86 could at least keep you consistant OS wise.

My question is, has anyone used x86 solaris in this situation? It seems that it may be a good option, allowing you to use PeeCee hardware, use a similar OS to your clients, and save some money on hardware. Last I knew x86 Sol had pretty decent raid controller support but I can't attest to that now.

-Aaron

Re:Go with the sun...

[Michael Neuffer]

The NFSv4 for SUN and Linux is done in parallel. SUN is sponsoring the Linux development. Hopefully there shouldn't be much of a time difference between the release of NFSv4 for Solaris and Linux.

Go with the sun...

[loony]

It saves you a lot of trouble... NFSv3 isn't all that great on the linux side and then the problems with the different FS (reiser can get corrupted with NFS...)
Also, NFS4 will be out (sometime soon I hope) and that will be easier to handle if you dont have to wait 2 years for a stable implementation on linux...

Reisefs + NFS

[mbyte]

They have still some troubles .. there's some patch on the reisefs homepage agains 2.4.2, that makes them work together nicely.

If you want a stable NFS box, don't go for linux 2.4.2. (see above ! I bet there are more problems like this)

don't get me wrong, 2.4.x NFS is quite nice, but its NEW, and UNTESTED ... so don't use it in your production enviroment !

Re:AFS

[acoopersmith]

NFS can be configured to use various authentication methods on many OS'es, including DES & kerberos. Unfortunately, Linux NFS only supports the simple "trust the client host not to lie to you" default NFS authentication. This should change when NFSv4 is adopted.

Both work - depends on you

[blakestah]

The rub here is that both work just fine. One is free. One costs money. One is developed to Suns specs, the other is Suns specs. Most experienced admins will say choose the Sun. I say, we use them both. They both work fine, even in a production environment. Backup often, and use the one you are more comfortable adminning.

Look seriously at a BSD

[gavcam]

You should seriously look at one of the BSDs. We ran a pure BSD based ISP. Many machines, many NFS mounts, no problems.

Highly recommended.

Option C:

[The Madpostal Worker]

FreeBSD!

I know you didnt suggest it, but its free, and has an excellent NFS subsystem.

/*
*Not a Sermon, Just a Thought
*/