On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 01:44:46AM +0530, Anand Avati wrote: > can you try the same test without AFR? umh without AFR, I have good results : couppey:/tmp# time cp /mnt/speedTest/128Mo.img ./ real 0m11.215s user 0m0.012s sys 0m0.396s couppey:/tmp# time cp /mnt/speedTest/128Mo.img ./ real 0m2.060s user 0m0.012s sys 0m0.464s couppey:/tmp# time cp /mnt/speedTest/128Mo.img ./ real 0m4.771s user 0m0.012s sys 0m0.476s couppey:/tmp# time cp /mnt/speedTest/128Mo.img ./ real 0m4.515s user 0m0.012s sys 0m0.476s couppey:/tmp# time cp /mnt/speedTest/128Mo.img ./ real 0m11.399s user 0m0.016s sys 0m0.428s couppey:/tmp# time cp /mnt/speedTest/128Mo.img ./ real 0m4.177s user 0m0.008s sys 0m0.496s couppey:/tmp# time cp /mnt/speedTest/128Mo.img ./ real 0m2.002s user 0m0.020s sys 0m0.460s couppey:/tmp# time cp /mnt/speedTest/128Mo.img ./ real 0m2.413s user 0m0.004s sys 0m0.496s > the reason might be inconsistant > mtime being returned by AFR which is being discussed in another thread > between Krishna and Li Daobing. Also, we suggest you upgrade to > glusterfs--mainline--2.5--patch-628 from the TLA. unfortunatelly after 2 h I am not able to compile it on RH5 or Centos 5, (tla is not even packaged for these systems) even with adding all the libs fuse, flex .... python2.4 present on the system is not recognise. I think I ll have to wait for the .deb and .rpm of the 1.3.8 > > > I discovered the GLFS 2 days ago, and have been since testing it. > > > Good luck with the testing! do reach us for questions. > > avati
