[tahoe-dev] [tahoe-lafs] #1189: investigate best FUSE+sshfs options to use for performance and correctness of SFTP via sshfs

[tahoe-lafs]

#1189: investigate best FUSE+sshfs options to use for performance and correctness
of SFTP via sshfs
-------------------------------+--------------------------------------------
     Reporter:  davidsarah     |       Owner:                             
         Type:  defect         |      Status:  new                        
     Priority:  major          |   Milestone:  undecided                  
    Component:  code-frontend  |     Version:  1.8β                       
   Resolution:                 |    Keywords:  sftp sshfs performance docs
Launchpad Bug:                 |  
-------------------------------+--------------------------------------------

Comment (by davidsarah):

 Thanks bj0.

 {{{big_writes}}} should only affect writes, and I can't immediately see
 why it would have anything but a beneficial effect. {{{direct_io}}} might
 affect both reads and writes, and could cause some loss of performance for
 applications that are relying for performance on kernel caching. Can you
 try the same tests with {{{-o big_writes}}} only?

 [I initially suggested both because http://xtreemfs.blogspot.com/2008/08
 /fuse-performance.html said that {{{direct_io}}} was needed (at least for
 some version of sshfs and Linux tested in 2008) to support writing in
 blocks greater than 4 KiB. However, point 2 in
 http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.fuse.devel/5292 suggests
 that this restriction might have been lifted.]

 What Linux kernel version and sshfs version did you use?

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/ticket/1189#comment:3>
tahoe-lafs <http://tahoe-lafs.org>
secure decentralized storage