> -----Original Message----- > From: Liam Slusser [mailto:lslusser at gmail.com] > Sent: 18 August 2009 18:51 > To: Hiren Joshi > Cc: gluster-users at gluster.org > Subject: Re: Interesting experiment > > On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 3:05 AM, Hiren > Joshi<josh at moonfruit.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Ok, the basic setup is 6 bricks per server, 2 servers. > Mirror the six > > bricks and DHT them. > > > > I'm running three tests, dd 1G of zeros to the gluster > mount, dd 1000 > > 100k files and dd 1000 1M files. > > > > With 3M write-behind I get: > > 0m35.460s for 1G file > > 0m52.427s for 100k files > > 1m37.209s for 1M files > > > > Then I added a 400M external journal to all the bricks, the > twist being > > the journals were made on a ram drive.... > > > > Running the same tests: > > 0m33.614s for 1G file > > 0m52.851s for 100k files > > 1m31.693s for 1M files > > > > > > So why is it that adding an external journal (in the ram!) > seems to make > > no difference at all? > > I would imagine that most of your bottle neck is with the network and > not the disks. Modern raid disk storage systems are much quicker than > gigabit ethernet. You're right, the raid gives me great (SSD type) performance! This is interesting, I'm on a gigabit network and it looks like it's maxing out.... when I dd a 1Gig file: about 180000 kbits/sec When I dd 1000 1M files: about 80000 kbits/sec Is it worth bonding? This look like I'm maxing out the network connection. > > liam >
