Stas, Are you talking about Ceph or AWS? 2016-09-22 4:31 GMT+03:00 Stas Starikevich <stas.starikevich@xxxxxxxxx>: > Felix, > > According to my tests there is difference in performance between usual named > buckets (test, test01, test02), uuid-named buckets (like > '7c9e4a81-df86-4c9d-a681-3a570de109db') or just date ('2016-09-20-16h'). > Getting ~3x more upload performance (220 uploads\s vs 650 uploads\s) with > SSD-backed indexes or 'blind buckets' feature enabled. > > Stas > > On Sep 21, 2016, at 1:28 PM, Félix Barbeira <fbarbeira@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, > > Regarding to Amazon S3 documentation, it is advised to insert a bit of > random chars in the bucket name in order to gain performance. This is > related to how Amazon store key names. It looks like they store an index of > object key names in each region. > > http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/dev/request-rate-perf-considerations.html#workloads-with-mix-request-types > > My question is: is this also a good practice in a ceph cluster where all the > nodes are in the same datacenter? It is relevant in ceph the name of the > bucket to gain more performance? I think it's not, because all the data is > spread in the placement groups all over the osd nodes, no matter what bucket > name he got. Can anyone confirm this? > > Thanks in advance. > > -- > Félix Barbeira. > _______________________________________________ > ceph-users mailing list > ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > ceph-users mailing list > ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com > _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com