1) Stock fuse, or glusterfs patched fuse? See
http://ftp.zresearch.com/pub/gluster/glusterfs/fuse/. The Glusterfs
team has some changes to some default values in fuse to make it perform
better for common glusterfs scenarios, as well as a fix for locking, so
you are better off using the glusterfs supplied fuse if you want better
performance and or locking.
2) The read-ahead and write-behind translators are there to boost
performance for certain scenarios if you know the types of access your
mount will be doing much of the time.
3) The real speed benefits arise when you are able to span reads across
multiple servers, increasing response and transfer rate. This is where
the real benefits are (as well as redundancy), which NFS can't really
compete with (unless you're using Solaris).
4) That's a real close benchmark. Are you sure the medium over which
you are transferring the data isn't maxed? IB or TCP/IP? 100Mbit or
1000Mbit (and server grade or workstation grade cards if gigabit).
Chris Johnson wrote:
On Tue, 6 Nov 2007, Anand Avati wrote:
Fuse is fuse-2.7.0-1. Can you give me an example of a volume
specification file please?
Chris,
posting your volume specification files will help us tune it futher.
Also,
what fuse version (kernel module) are you using?
--
-Kevan Benson
-A-1 Networks
