|
It is true that there are some very high performance NFS systems out there, throughput optimized like Isilon, and some IOPS optimized like Tintri. A lot of enterprise virtualization systems store their VM disks on NFS and seem to perform decently. But in a general sense, when I've seen suggestions to use NFS, it hasn't been the correct solution. Like a system that is designed to run on a single server, and someone wants to make it active-active HA by pointing two servers at the same data over NFS. No, that won't work. Or the high IOPS system, and someone wants to move it to a throughput optimized NFS service. Or the team the decided it was a good idea to log from multiple servers to a single file over NFS, and then complained that their log messages were not being written in order. Or having multiple web servers (HA!) serve media off a single NFS server. In this specific case, if someone is maximizing IOPS per server, it probably isn't a good idea to use a single large volume exported via NFS and share it across them. Max IOPS for gp2 volumes is 10,000, for io1 it is 32,000. Sharing a single 10,000 IOPS volume across a bunch of servers isn't going to get you a bunch of 10,000 IOPS volumes. Based on my experience, I instinctively question the use of NFS, it is so rarely the right solution in a cloud environment. Sometimes it is the right solution, I'm just saying it is pretty rare. |