02.09.2015 16:34, Bob Peterson wrote:
----- Original Message -----
(snip)
Yes, that is a filesystem used only for tests so I can provide its
metadata. I'll sent a link to you when it is ready.
Should fs be unmounted btw?
Yes, the file system should be unmounted from all nodes before doing
gfs2_edit savemeta.
Is your work going to be available on RHEL7/Centos7 or is it just RHEL6/Centos6?
We've done many performance improvements in RHEL7 that have not been
back-ported to RHEL6, so if you're after better performance and reliability,
you may consider RHEL7/Centos7.
That is centos6 with backported cluster stack (latest corosync,
pacemaker, dlm, clvmd rebuilt for corosync2, experimental rewrite of
gfs_controld for corosync2).
Thank you for hint about performance, unfortunately my customer is not
willing to upgrade to centos7 yet (that is really huge task), but that
could be a valid reason for future releases if we see insufficient
performance. Current performance tests (at least pure throughput) with
DRBD over IPoIB and dedicated corosync/dlm link are satisfying (10Gbps
link is fully saturated by NFS/CIFS clients). And we do not have many
metadata operations on GFS2 level.
Do you have any plans to backport that improvements btw?
Thank you,
Vladislav
--
Linux-cluster mailing list
Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
