Thanks for answer.
About using performance translators like io-cache, read-ahead and
write-behind only in
glusterfs I'm having problem about achieving better performance. I'm
running glusterfs
2.0.2-1 debian with patched fuse (fuse-2.7.4glfs11) on 3 test machines
with AFR with client
side replication (2 servers and 1 client). Here is results from
bonnie++ tests running on the
client glusterfs.
Without performance translators: ------Sequential
Output------ --Sequential Input- --Random-
-Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block-- --Seeks--
Time Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec %CP
18m28s 50M 2012 4 1168 0 730 0 8020 22 7960
0 531.7 0
------Sequential Create------ --------Random Create--------
files:max:min -Create-- --Read--- -Delete--
-Create-- --Read--- -Delete--
10:15000:100/100 /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP
/sec %CP /sec %CP
37 0 135 0 92 0 44 0 82 0
87 0
With io-threads translator on glusterfs servers:
------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input- --Random-
-Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block-- --Seeks--
Time Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec %CP
32m35s 50M 1415 2 1024 0 670 0 8112 21 8333
0 488.7 0
------Sequential Create------ --------Random Create--------
files:max:min -Create-- --Read--- -Delete--
-Create-- --Read--- -Delete--
10:15000:100/100 /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP
/sec %CP /sec %CP
16 0 68 0 94 0
16 0 58 0 95 0
With io-cache and write-behind translators on glusterfs client:
------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input- --Random-
-Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block-- --Seeks--
Time Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec %CP
37m55s 50M 2431 5 2517 0 403 0 8073 22 +++
+++ 72.2 0
------Sequential Create------ --------Random Create--------
files:max:min -Create-- --Read--- -Delete--
-Create-- --Read--- -Delete--
10:15000:100/100 /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP
/sec %CP /sec %CP
13 0 125 0 91 0
13 0 82 0 78 0
With io-cache translator on glusterfs client:
------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input- --Random-
-Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block-- --Seeks--
Time Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec %CP
20m28s 50M 1797 3 1177 0 389 0 8081 22 +++
+++ 75.4 0
------Sequential Create------ --------Random Create--------
files:max:min -Create-- --Read--- -Delete--
-Create-- --Read--- -Delete--
10:15000:100/100 /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP
/sec %CP /sec %CP
40 0 134 0 104 0 42 0 80 0
92 0
The best result is using glusterfs without performance translators
especially small files. How to achieve best performance with small
files?
Thanks,
Snezhana
Цитат от Shehjar Tikoo <shehjart@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
Снежана Бекова wrote:
Hello, I found this very interesting publucation about achieving high
performance with memcached and glusterfs:
http://nowlab.cse.ohio-state.edu/publications/conf-papers/2008/noronha-icpp08.pdf
Anybody runnig this? Info on how to achive such config with memcached?
Thanks for bringing it up.
Yes, we're aware of this work but we feel that they've taken a
long-winded approach to provide caching of file attributes and data by
using mem-cached. It is an interesting approach but the combination of
io-cache, read-ahead and write-behind, while being far far simpler in
design and usage, already handles a large number of
use cases envisioned by the authors.
Of course, if you're considering using memcached-based approach, we'd
be interested in hearing about your experience with glusterfs+memcached
combo.
Regards
Shehjar
Thanks, Snezhana
_______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing
list Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
