can someone tell me what the focus of this list is, for sure ? eg, is this gfs only ? or clustering for 2.6 kernel in general eg we can also bring up ocfs2 or should I shut up on the ocfs2 side ? On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 05:15:05PM -0700, Daniel McNeil wrote: > I had more time to test GFS. Reminder of the setup > (note: I added more memory so the machines are up to 1GB). > 3 machines each: > 2 processor (800 MHZ Pentium 3) > 1GB of memory > 2 100Mb ethernet (1 public, 1 private) > 1 2-port Qlogic FC host adapter > 2 F/C sitches cascaded together > 1 - 10 disk - dual controller FASTT200 (36GB 10,000rpm drives) > > The command run was 'time tar xf /Views/linux-2.6.8.1.tar; > time sync' where /Views is an NFS mounted file system and > the current working directory is in a clean file system on > a 5-disk stripe 64k stripe width). For the 2 node case, > I ran the command in separate directories on each node. > For comparison, the ext3 file system in on a single scsi > disk in data=ordered. > > > Tar > --- real user sys > ext3 tar 0m6.535s 0m0.429s 0m4.010s > ext3 sync 0m21.953s 0m0.000s 0m0.574s > > gfs 1 node tar 1m15.286s 0m0.787s 0m17.085s > gfs 1 node sync 0m7.734s 0m0.000s 0m0.190s > > gfs 2 node tar 3m58.337s 0m0.844s 0m17.082s > gfs 2 node sync 0m3.119s 0m0.000s 0m0.117s > gfs 2 node tar 3m55.147s 0m0.911s 0m17.529s > gfs 2 node sync 0m1.862s 0m0.001s 0m0.043s > > > du -s linux-2.6.8.1 (after 1st mount) > ----- real user sys > ext3 0m5.361s 0m0.039s 0m0.318s > gfs 1 node 0m46.077s 0m0.097s 0m5.144s > gfs 2 node 0m40.835s 0m0.069s 0m3.218s > gfs 2 node 0m41.313s 0m0.089s 0m3.348s > > Doing a 2nd du -s should be cached. On ext3 is always > seems to be. On gfs the numbers vary quite a bit. > > 2nd du -s > --------- > ext3 0m0.130s 0m0.028s 0m0.101s > gfs 1 node 0m20.95s 0m0.075s 0m3.102s > gfs 1 node 0m0.453s 0m0.044s 0m0.408s > gfs 2 node 0m0.446s 0m0.046s 0m0.400s > gfs 2 node 0m0.456s 0m0.028s 0m0.428s > > rm -rf linux-2.6.8.1 > -------------------- > ext3 0m5.050s 0m0.019s 0m0.822s > gfs 1 node 0m28.583s 0m0.094s 0m8.354s > gfs 2 node 7m16.295s 0m0.073s 0m7.785s > gfs 2 node 8m30.809s 0m0.086s 0m7.759s > > > Comment/questions: > > Tar on gfs on 1 node is nearly 3x slower than ext3. > Tar on 2 gfs nodes in parallel is showing reverse scaling: > 2 nodes take 4 minutes. > > Is there some reason why sync is so fast on gfs? > ext3 shows fast tar then long sync, gfs show long > tar and fairly fast sync. > > 1 time du is around 8 times slow than ext3. This must the > time in instantiate and acquire the DLM locks for the > inodes. > > Do you know the expected time to get instantiate and acquire a > DLM lock? > > rm is 6 times slower on gfs than ext3. Reverse scaling > on removes happening on 2 nodes in parallel. These are > in separate directories, so one would not expect DLM > conflicts. > > Thoughts? > > Daniel > > -- > > Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
