Hi Ben I checked out the glusterfs process attaching gdb and I could not find the newer code. Can you confirm whether you took the new patch ? patch i: http://review.gluster.org/#/c/9657/ Thanks, Susant ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Susant Palai" <spalai@xxxxxxxxxx> > To: "Benjamin Turner" <bennyturns@xxxxxxxxx>, "Nithya Balachandran" <nbalacha@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: "Shyamsundar Ranganathan" <srangana@xxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2015 1:22:02 PM > Subject: Re: Rebalance improvement design > > This is how it looks for 2000 file. each 1MB. Done rebalance on 2*2 + 2. > > OLDER: > [root@gprfs030 ~]# gluster v rebalance test1 status > Node Rebalanced-files size > scanned failures > skipped status run > time in secs > --------- ----------- ----------- > ----------- ----------- ----------- > ------------ -------------- > localhost 2000 1.9GB > 3325 0 0 > completed 63.00 > gprfs032-10ge 0 0Bytes > 2158 0 0 > completed 6.00 > volume rebalance: test1: success: > [root@gprfs030 ~]# > > > NEW: > [root@gprfs030 upstream_rebalance]# gluster v rebalance test1 status > Node Rebalanced-files size > scanned failures > skipped status run > time in secs > --------- ----------- ----------- > ----------- ----------- ----------- > ------------ -------------- > localhost 2000 1.9GB > 2011 0 0 > completed 12.00 > gprfs032-10ge 0 0Bytes > 0 0 0 > failed 0.00 [Failed > because of a crash which I will address in next > patch] > volume rebalance: test1: success: > > > Just trying out replica behaviour for rebalance. > > Here is the volume info. > [root@gprfs030 ~]# gluster v i > > Volume Name: test1 > Type: Distributed-Replicate > Volume ID: e12ef289-86f2-454a-beaa-72ea763dbada > Status: Started > Number of Bricks: 3 x 2 = 6 > Transport-type: tcp > Bricks: > Brick1: gprfs030-10ge:/bricks/gprfs030/brick1 > Brick2: gprfs032-10ge:/bricks/gprfs032/brick1 > Brick3: gprfs030-10ge:/bricks/gprfs030/brick2 > Brick4: gprfs032-10ge:/bricks/gprfs032/brick2 > Brick5: gprfs030-10ge:/bricks/gprfs030/brick3 > Brick6: gprfs032-10ge:/bricks/gprfs032/brick3 > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Susant Palai" <spalai@xxxxxxxxxx> > > To: "Benjamin Turner" <bennyturns@xxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: "Gluster Devel" <gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2015 1:13:04 PM > > Subject: Re: Rebalance improvement design > > > > Ben, will you be able to give rebal stat for the same configuration and > > data > > set with older rebalance infra ? > > > > Thanks, > > Susant > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Susant Palai" <spalai@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > To: "Benjamin Turner" <bennyturns@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Cc: "Gluster Devel" <gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2015 12:08:38 PM > > > Subject: Re: Rebalance improvement design > > > > > > Hi Ben, > > > Yes we were using pure dist volume. Will check in to your systems for > > > more > > > info. > > > > > > Can you please update which patch set you used ? In the mean time I will > > > do > > > one set of test with the same configuration on a small data set. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Susant > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "Benjamin Turner" <bennyturns@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > To: "Nithya Balachandran" <nbalacha@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Cc: "Susant Palai" <spalai@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Gluster Devel" > > > > <gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2015 2:13:05 AM > > > > Subject: Re: Rebalance improvement design > > > > > > > > I am not seeing the performance you were. I am running on 500GB of > > > > data: > > > > > > > > [root@gqas001 ~]# gluster v rebalance testvol status > > > > Node Rebalanced-files > > > > size scanned failures skipped status > > > > run > > > > time in secs > > > > --------- ----------- > > > > ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- > > > > ------------ > > > > -------------- > > > > localhost 129021 > > > > 7.9GB 912104 0 0 in progress > > > > 10100.00 > > > > gqas012.sbu.lab.eng.bos.redhat.com 0 0Bytes > > > > 1930312 0 0 in progress > > > > 10100.00 > > > > gqas003.sbu.lab.eng.bos.redhat.com 0 0Bytes > > > > 1930312 0 0 in progress > > > > 10100.00 > > > > gqas004.sbu.lab.eng.bos.redhat.com 128903 7.9GB > > > > 946730 0 0 in progress > > > > 10100.00 > > > > gqas013.sbu.lab.eng.bos.redhat.com 0 0Bytes > > > > 1930312 0 0 in progress > > > > 10100.00 > > > > gqas014.sbu.lab.eng.bos.redhat.com 0 0Bytes > > > > 1930312 0 0 in progress > > > > 10100.00 > > > > > > > > Based on what I am seeing I expect this to take 2 days. Was you rebal > > > > run > > > > on a pure dist volume? I am trying on 2x2 + 2 new bricks. Any idea > > > > why > > > > mine is taking so long? > > > > > > > > -b > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 1:10 AM, Nithya Balachandran > > > > <nbalacha@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > That sounds great. Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > Nithya > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > From: "Benjamin Turner" <bennyturns@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > To: "Nithya Balachandran" <nbalacha@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > Cc: "Susant Palai" <spalai@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Gluster Devel" < > > > > > gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, 22 April, 2015 12:14:14 AM > > > > > Subject: Re: Rebalance improvement design > > > > > > > > > > I am setting up a test env now, I'll have some feedback for you this > > > > > week. > > > > > > > > > > -b > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Nithya Balachandran > > > > > <nbalacha@xxxxxxxxxx > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Ben, > > > > > > > > > > > > Did you get a chance to try this out? > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Nithya > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > From: "Susant Palai" <spalai@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > To: "Benjamin Turner" <bennyturns@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Cc: "Gluster Devel" <gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 9:55:07 AM > > > > > > Subject: Re: Rebalance improvement design > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Ben, > > > > > > Uploaded a new patch here: http://review.gluster.org/#/c/9657/. > > > > > > We > > > > > > can > > > > > > start perf test on it. :) > > > > > > > > > > > > Susant > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > From: "Susant Palai" <spalai@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > To: "Benjamin Turner" <bennyturns@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Cc: "Gluster Devel" <gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, 9 April, 2015 3:40:09 PM > > > > > > Subject: Re: Rebalance improvement design > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks Ben. RPM is not available and I am planning to refresh the > > > > > > patch > > > > > in > > > > > > two days with some more regression fixes. I think we can run the > > > > > > tests > > > > > post > > > > > > that. Any larger data-set will be good(say 3 to 5 TB). > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Susant > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > From: "Benjamin Turner" <bennyturns@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > To: "Vijay Bellur" <vbellur@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Cc: "Susant Palai" <spalai@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Gluster Devel" < > > > > > > gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, 9 April, 2015 2:10:30 AM > > > > > > Subject: Re: Rebalance improvement design > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have some rebalance perf regression stuff I have been working on, > > > > > > is > > > > > > there an RPM with these patches anywhere so that I can try it on my > > > > > > systems? If not I'll just build from: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > git fetch git:// review.gluster.org/glusterfs > > > > > > refs/changes/57/9657/8 > > > > > > && > > > > > > git cherry-pick FETCH_HEAD > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I will have _at_least_ 10TB of storage, how many TBs of data should > > > > > > I > > > > > > run > > > > > > with? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -b > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 9:07 AM, Vijay Bellur < vbellur@xxxxxxxxxx > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 04/07/2015 03:08 PM, Susant Palai wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here is one test performed on a 300GB data set and around 100%(1/2 > > > > > > the > > > > > > time) improvement was seen. > > > > > > > > > > > > [root@gprfs031 ~]# gluster v i > > > > > > > > > > > > Volume Name: rbperf > > > > > > Type: Distribute > > > > > > Volume ID: 35562662-337e-4923-b862- d0bbb0748003 > > > > > > Status: Started > > > > > > Number of Bricks: 4 > > > > > > Transport-type: tcp > > > > > > Bricks: > > > > > > Brick1: gprfs029-10ge:/bricks/ gprfs029/brick1 > > > > > > Brick2: gprfs030-10ge:/bricks/ gprfs030/brick1 > > > > > > Brick3: gprfs031-10ge:/bricks/ gprfs031/brick1 > > > > > > Brick4: gprfs032-10ge:/bricks/ gprfs032/brick1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Added server 32 and started rebalance force. > > > > > > > > > > > > Rebalance stat for new changes: > > > > > > [root@gprfs031 ~]# gluster v rebalance rbperf status > > > > > > Node Rebalanced-files size scanned failures skipped status run time > > > > > > in > > > > > secs > > > > > > --------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- > > > > > > ----------- > > > > > > ------------ -------------- > > > > > > localhost 74639 36.1GB 297319 0 0 completed 1743.00 > > > > > > 172.17.40.30 67512 33.5GB 269187 0 0 completed 1395.00 > > > > > > gprfs029-10ge 79095 38.8GB 284105 0 0 completed 1559.00 > > > > > > gprfs032-10ge 0 0Bytes 0 0 0 completed 402.00 > > > > > > volume rebalance: rbperf: success: > > > > > > > > > > > > Rebalance stat for old model: > > > > > > [root@gprfs031 ~]# gluster v rebalance rbperf status > > > > > > Node Rebalanced-files size scanned failures skipped status run time > > > > > > in > > > > > secs > > > > > > --------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- > > > > > > ----------- > > > > > > ------------ -------------- > > > > > > localhost 86493 42.0GB 634302 0 0 completed 3329.00 > > > > > > gprfs029-10ge 94115 46.2GB 687852 0 0 completed 3328.00 > > > > > > gprfs030-10ge 74314 35.9GB 651943 0 0 completed 3072.00 > > > > > > gprfs032-10ge 0 0Bytes 594166 0 0 completed 1943.00 > > > > > > volume rebalance: rbperf: success: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is interesting. Thanks for sharing & well done! Maybe we > > > > > > should > > > > > > attempt a much larger data set and see how we fare there :). > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vijay > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ______________________________ _________________ > > > > > > Gluster-devel mailing list > > > > > > Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx > > > > > > http://www.gluster.org/ mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > Gluster-devel mailing list > > > > > > Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx > > > > > > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > Gluster-devel mailing list > > > > > > Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx > > > > > > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Gluster-devel mailing list > > > Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx > > > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Gluster-devel mailing list > > Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx > > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel > > > _______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
