> > > Have you tried chaining AFR volumes? There's quite a few ways I can > imagine reducing line saturation if that's the problem. Here's one: > > server1 has an afr of a local volume and a volume from server2 > > server3 has an afr of a local volume and a volume from server4 > > client afr of server1's afr and server2's afr > > This should allow a single write from a client at 1000/8/2 = 62.5 > MByte/s. Client writes only twice (to server1 and server3) halving the > bandwidth. Server1 and server3 write only once each to server2 and > server4 respectively and receive the writes from the client, halving > their bandwidth. > > Note: I have no idea how well this will perform in reality. There may > be enough lag in glusterfs chaining writes that the gains aren't worth > it, but I suspect since it is effectively pipelining the writes along > there won't be too much lag. Good thought kevan, it sounds like a good in-between solution. Jerker, this might work even better for you if the server-server interconnects are on a seperate physical media not cascaded with the server-client interconnect. avati -- It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's Law. -- Hofstadter's Law
