On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 05:43:24PM +0200, Ferenc Wagner wrote: > Let's see. Mounting on one more node (and switching on the third): > > # cman_tool services > type level name id state > fence 0 default 00010001 none > [1 2 3] > dlm 1 clvmd 00020001 none > [1 2 3] > dlm 1 test 000a0001 none > [1 2] > gfs 2 test 00090001 none > [1 2] > > $ <commands to run the test> > filecount=500 > iteration=0 elapsed time=5.030971 s > iteration=1 elapsed time=0.657682 s > iteration=2 elapsed time=0.798228 s > iteration=3 elapsed time=0.65742 s > iteration=4 elapsed time=0.776301 s > total elapsed time=7.920602 s > > Somewhat slower, yes. But still pretty fast. > > Mounting on the third node: > > # cman_tool services > type level name id state > fence 0 default 00010001 none > [1 2 3] > dlm 1 clvmd 00020001 none > [1 2 3] > dlm 1 test 000a0001 none > [1 2 3] > gfs 2 test 00090001 none > [1 2 3] > > $ <commands to run the test> > filecount=500 > iteration=0 elapsed time=0.822107 s > iteration=1 elapsed time=0.656789 s > iteration=2 elapsed time=0.657798 s > iteration=3 elapsed time=0.881496 s > iteration=4 elapsed time=0.659481 s > total elapsed time=3.677671 s > > It's much the same... OK, that's interesting. I was led to believe from some of my old testing that plocks wouldn't be that fast, but maybe that was a mistaken conclusion. There's no reason not to use plocks with -l0 if you're getting good results. Dave -- Linux-cluster mailing list Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
