> It is an unfair to compare clustered filesystems and local disk > filesystems directly. You can try a few optimizations - the io-threads > is pretty much useless on the client side in 1.4/2.0 branch (since the > introduction of non blocking sockets). You can remove read-ahead too > since I understand your IO pattern largely involves random IO, and for > sequential IO glusterfs can achieve link max speed on Gig/E even > without read-ahead. After these changes you might also want to try > with and without write-behind because these performance translators > are meant to be used with streaming IO. > WRF is not the only thing running on the cluster. Direct I/O of 1GB takes 2.7 seconds. NFS takes 17 seconds. Gluster takes 100 seconds. > Do you have a comparison against NFS? (since you are using glusterfs > in a single server mode anyways). Can you also post the test program > which simulates your work load? > I've already sent you a copy of the program -- Matt
