[gfarm-discuss:17248] Re: Gfarm version 2.0.0 released

[Naotaka YAMAMOTO <naotaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thank you, sada-san,

I understood you said. But could you explain more detail?
In my understanding, gfarm_agent(v1) has to hold all fullpath string 
in their memory, because it dose not have directory structure.
Dose Gfmd(v2) have directory structure or something
to diet memory usage?

thanks again,

- Naotaka

> >>>>> On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 09:52:03 +0900 (JST),
>       Naotaka YAMAMOTO <naotaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> said:
> 
> > Dear Tatebe-san and all,
> > Congratulations on gfarm v2! I'm looking forward to imporove
> > metadata accesses. However, I wonder how dose Gfmd need memory
> > space on metadata node? So, I'm using Gfarm v1 with gfarm_agent
> > which use over 4GB (4.2GB now). My metadata server (PostgreSQL)
> > has about 26 milion pathname with about 70 Bytes (70 charactors of pathname).
> > Dose Gfmd(v2) require memory less than gfarm_agent(v1)?
> 
> It depends. :)
> 
> At logical level, the metadata information that gfmd(v2) holds in
> physical memory is more than the metadata that gfarm_agent(v2) holds.
> But it's possible that gfmd(v2) requires less memory than gfarm_agent(v1),
> because in-memory pathname representation of gfmd(v2) is far more
> efficient than the representation of gfarm_agent(v1).
> -- 
> soda
>