[gpfsug-discuss] Gateway role on a NSD server

[Christopher Black]

We've done it both ways. You will get better performance and fewer challenges of ensuring processes and memory don't step on eachother if afm gateway node is not also doing nsd server work. However, using an nsd server that mounts two filesystems (one via mmremotefs from another cluster) did work.

Best,
Chris

On 5/31/19, 2:56 PM, "gpfsug-discuss-bounces at spectrumscale.org on behalf of Weil, Matthew" <gpfsug-discuss-bounces at spectrumscale.org on behalf of mweil at wustl.edu> wrote:

    Hello all,

    How important is it to separate these two roles.  planning on using AFM
    and I am wondering if we should have the gateways on different nodes
    than the NSDs.  Any opinions?  What about fail overs and maintenance?
    Could one role effect the other?

    Thanks

    Matt

    _______________________________________________
    gpfsug-discuss mailing list
    gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
    https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gpfsug.org_mailman_listinfo_gpfsug-2Ddiscuss&d=DwIGaQ&c=C9X8xNkG_lwP_-eFHTGejw&r=DopWM-bvfskhBn2zeglfyyw5U2pumni6m_QzQFYFepU&m=ZRGpE3XENwtAlhLHRmvswDiYLgHX5WHNzqGhdZmqMCw&s=23djes6DK8Uzh7SLRQwUA-KphzsnVONiU4ieADwQwMA&e=


________________________________

This message is for the recipient’s use only, and may contain confidential, privileged or protected information. Any unauthorized use or dissemination of this communication is prohibited. If you received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and destroy all copies of this message. The recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses, as we accept no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.