Hi, On Fri, 2011-07-22 at 12:08 +0200, Jordi Renye wrote: > Hi, > > We have configured redhat cluster RHEL 6.1 with two nodes. > We have seen that performance of GFS2 on writing is > half of ext3 partition. > > For example, time of commands: > > time cp -Rp /usr /gfs2partition/usr > 0.681u 47.082s 7:01.80 11.3% 0+0k 561264+2994832io 0pf+0w > > whereas > > cp -R /usr /ext3partition/usr > 0.543u 24.041s 4:16.86 9.5% 0+0k 2728584+3166184io 2pf+0w > > With ping_pong tool from Samba.org we've got next results: > > Los resultados son los siguientes: > > ping_pong /gfs2partition/pingpongtestfile 3 > 1582 locks/sec > > With ping_pong test r/w: > > ping_pong -rw /gfs2partition/pingpongtestfile 3 > data increment = 2 > 4 locks/sec > > Do you think we can get better performance? Do you think > are "normal" and "good" results ? > > Which recommendations do you tell us to get better performance? > > For example, we don't have a heartbeat network exclusively, but > we have only one networks interface for application network and cluster > network. > Could we get better performance with one dedicated cluster network( for > dlm,heartbeath,...). > > Thanks in advanced, > It depends what you are trying to optimise for... what is the actual application that you want to run? cp doesn't use fcntl locks to the best of my knowledge, so I doubt that will have any particular effect on the performance. Also it would be quite unusual for fcntl locks to have any effect on the performance of the fs as a whole. Usually the most important factor is how the workload is balances between nodes. Also, did you mount with noatime, nodiratime? Steve. -- Linux-cluster mailing list Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
