Linux - ServerThis forum is for the discussion of Linux Software used in a server related context.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Distribution: Red Hat Enterprise Linux, Fedora, CentOS
Posts: 134
Rep:
Symlink vs. Mountpoint Performance ?
I'm setting up a server cluster using RHEL5. It's a two-node cluster for servering web content. I'll be pointing by Apache configuration to a shared /web directory that is served via NFS by a Network Appliance NAS device.
I'm interested in the performance considerations in choosing to create a separate /web mountpoint in my server's local filesystem using /etc/fstab vs. creating a /netapp mountpoint and then creating a /web symlink that would point to /netapp/web.
Keep in mind that both cluster nodes will need to have access to the content within /web for redundancy during a cluster node failover.
Does anyone out there have any advice for me on this?
symlinks will not give anything notable in terms of a performance hit, but you've not said why you would want to do this... seems totally arbitrary to me. I don't understand the reasons for this apparent separation. Maybe you want to look at a bind mount for multiple mount points rather than a symlink??
Distribution: Red Hat Enterprise Linux, Fedora, CentOS
Posts: 134
Original Poster
Rep:
A bind mount point won't really get me what I need. I have to have a /web directory due to the custom application that was created to run on this cluster (the app code isn't mine) but there will still be other shares from the NetApp NAS device also... such as /home which will point to /netapp/home via either symlink or mount point.
I'm migrating from an old non-clustered configuration that I didn't set up to a new cluster which I am setting up, and I've been told that the choice of mount point vs. symlink was due to some filesystem backup considerations at the time. Those are going away too.
There will be a considerable amount of disk I/O to the /web directory, which is what raised the question of any known performance benefit of symlink vs. mount point.
This is my first experience with this sort of configuration, so it's not inconceivable that I've gotten myself completely confused over this detail either.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.