Performance links RedHat Performance FAQ http://kbase.redhat.com/faq/FAQ_78_3152.shtm GFS Performance Tuning http://sourceware.org/cluster/faq.html#gfs_tuning Mount with noatime http://man.chinaunix.net/linux/redhat/rh-gfs-en-6.0/s1-manage-atimeconf.html Turn off disk quotas http://www.redhat.com/archives/linux-cluster/2006-August/msg00237.html Alexandre Racine Projets spéciaux 514-461-1300 poste 3304 alexandre.racine@xxxxxxxxx -----Original Message----- From: linux-cluster-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx on behalf of isplist@xxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Wed 2007-11-28 21:08 To: linux-cluster Subject: GFS and server performance = Application I've been trying to get a handle on web server performance on GFS mounted storage vs none. Since the other thread kind of got lost, I decided to start a new one. What I've found is interesting enough that I felt I should talk about it since I'm surely not the only one using Joomla, in this case. This test is without GFS mounted as the root of the web server. The root of the site only has an index.html file with little in it; #ab -k -n 100 -c 100 http://192.168.1.92/ Time taken for tests: 0.279518 seconds Requests per second: 357.76 [#/sec] (mean) Time per request: 279.518 [ms] (mean) Time per request: 2.795 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests) Transfer rate: 146.68 [Kbytes/sec] received Same test with GFS mounted as the root of the web server. The root of the site only has an index.html file with little in it; # ab -k -n 100 -c 100 http://192.168.1.92/ Time taken for tests: 0.162151 seconds Requests per second: 616.71 [#/sec] (mean) Time per request: 162.151 [ms] (mean) Time per request: 1.622 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests) Transfer rate: 160.34 [Kbytes/sec] received Similar right? Now, let's try the same test but this time, we add a full bore application, a Joomla site in this case at the root of the web server; #ab -k -n 100 -c 100 http://192.168.1.92/ Time taken for tests: 33.583784 seconds Requests per second: 2.98 [#/sec] (mean) Time per request: 33583.782 [ms] (mean) Time per request: 335.838 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests) Transfer rate: 27.42 [Kbytes/sec] received Quite the difference and little to do with GFS from what I can tell. And, this is what I am trying to confirm, and am asking from the community. Is there any fine tuning needed for GFS and the cluster itself as well as what ever I will do with the cluster later? In another thread, I was told that GFS would hurt performance and my thought was that well, yes, it would take up some of the servers resources but there should be plenty left over to handle web serving or what ever else the server needs to serve up. I've tested this in various ways today, from external connections, internal, various httpd.conf settings, it's always the same. While some of the httpd.conf settings have some effects, the biggest one is always what application is being run on the server. In this case, Joomla seems to be insanely resource intensive. Are there any thoughts on this so that I can know where I need to spend my time now. Should I worry about GFS and the cluster itself or move on and start trying to figure out how to get Joomla to run more effectively? Mike -- Linux-cluster mailing list Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
<<winmail.dat>>
-- Linux-cluster mailing list Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
