From 9180efc9bb20c786aed8681d089e077c088a2c65 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Chris Lu Date: Tue, 12 May 2020 21:53:59 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] Updated FUSE Mount (markdown) --- FUSE-Mount.md | 7 ++++++- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/FUSE-Mount.md b/FUSE-Mount.md index 0c124dc..35b2216 100644 --- a/FUSE-Mount.md +++ b/FUSE-Mount.md @@ -55,7 +55,12 @@ For writes: ### Weed Mount Performance -Due to the limitation of FUSE and network IO, the performance of the mounted file system is expected to be worse than local disk. `weed mount` added a local cache to improve read performance and a write buffer to batch writes, but it still needs to write to remote volume servers to ensure data persistence. +Compared to any other distributed file systems, the `weed mount` performance should exceed most other solutions, or at least on par. This is because `weed mount` has multiple optimization techniques: +* asynchronously replicate the metadata updates to local db. There are no remote metadata read operations at all. +* cached most recently accessed data. +* batch small writes into large writes. + +Due to the limitation of FUSE and network IO, the performance of the mounted file system is expected to be less than local disk. `weed mount` still needs to write to remote filer server and volume servers to ensure data persistence. So if your data is temporary local files, try to move the writes to other unmounted directories. If the data is shared across the distributed file system, the additional cost to write should be acceptable for most cases.