can you please share your spec files with glusterfs.pastebin.com ? thanks, avati 2008/1/20, Sascha Ottolski <ottolski@xxxxxx>: > > Am Samstag 19 Januar 2008 11:03:43 schrieb Sascha Ottolski: > > Am Freitag 18 Januar 2008 17:49:15 schrieb Anand Avati: > > > Sascha, > > > the reason why 1.3.0pre4 might be faster would not be because of > > > the missing namespace, but most likely because of missing > > > self-heal. can you try with 'option self-heal off' in the unify > > > section? > > > > may ask again, any idea why the old apache-1.3 performs way better on > > either gluster version than the others? or any idea which knobs to > > tweak to get more out of the others? > > now, another astonishing observation: if I enable the io-cache, it has a > good effect for apache1 (almost doubles the requests/second), but > almost none for apache2, nginx and lighttpd. > > could this help to understand more about the performance differences? > > > Thanks, Sascha > > > > > > > usally, for static files from a local fileseystem, one would expect > > that nginx and lighttpd would outperform the apaches remarcably...may > > be my observations have a common cause with those of > > http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/gluster-devel/2008-01/msg00142.h > >tml ? > > > > > > Thanks a lot, Sascha > > > > > are the test results same for multiple runs too? > > > > > > avati > > > > > > 2008/1/18, Sascha Ottolski <ottolski@xxxxxx>: > > > > Hi Folks, > > > > > > > > I'm wondering if anyone might have some general advices if I miss > > > > something important in my test setup. I'm trying to figure out > > > > how to tweak the configs to achieve the best performance, but get > > > > result that feel strange to me. I will post some numbers at a > > > > later point, but up to now what I discovered is: > > > > > > > > - glusterfs without a namespace (1.3.0pre4) seems to be > > > > significant faster than with namespace (tla patch-628) > > > > > > > > that seems to logical, at least I would expect some overhead for > > > > the namespace. > > > > > > > > what i absolutely not understand is, how different the webservers > > > > perform. i tested with > > > > > > > > siege -f /tmp/siege-urls.txt.new -c100 -i -r50 -b > > > > > > > > with up to 3 sessions in parellel, each firing it's requests to a > > > > seperate webserver (on seperate machines, of course). > > > > > > > > up to now my ranking by means of requests/per second is something > > > > like > > > > > > > > 630 | apache > > > > 430 | apache2 (worker) > > > > 350 | nginx > > > > 250 | lighttpd > > > > > > > > (with 1.3.0pre4 and no namespace, the best I've seen was apache2 > > > > with about 900, apache still 750). I must admit that up to now I > > > > did not compare it to local filesystem, but from my past > > > > experiences with webservers I would expect nginx and lighttpd way > > > > ahead of the apaches... > > > > > > > > Also, I exprimented a bit with different settings for io-threads > > > > on the server (1, 2, 4, 8, and cache-size 64 or 128MB), but that > > > > didn't seem to make much of a difference. Same with read-ahead > > > > (which seems logical, as I test with relatively small images). > > > > > > > > So far I did not try the booster. I use fuse-2.7.0-glfs7. I also > > > > did not try the latest tla nor fuse-2.7.2-glfs8. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for any pointer, > > > > > > > > Sascha > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Gluster-devel mailing list > > > > Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxx > > > > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Gluster-devel mailing list > > Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxx > > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Gluster-devel mailing list > Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel > -- If I traveled to the end of the rainbow As Dame Fortune did intend, Murphy would be there to tell me The pot's at the other end.
