Justice,
which is the libfuse version being used with glusterfs?. Just wanted to
know what are the metrics you observed while testing?, block size in which
writes/read were measured during testing?. etc,
Regards
--
Harshavardhana
Z Research Inc http://www.zresearch.com/
On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 11:45 PM, Justice London <jlondon at lawinfo.com> wrote:
> Well, mostly it seems to be on the throughput. I haven't really measured
> for
> metadata improvements yet.
>
> Of note, is that NFS is now working, but it appears to be EXTREMELY slow. I
> was only able to manage about 1-2MB/s
>
> Justice London
> E-mail: jlondon at lawinfo.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: anand.avati at gmail.com [mailto:anand.avati at gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> Anand Avati
> Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 4:02 PM
> To: Justice London
> Cc: gluster-users; Harshavardhana
> Subject: Re: Gluster (2.0.1 -> git) with fuse 2.8 crashes
> NFS
>
> > The 2.0.3 release of gluster appears so far to have fixed the crash issue
> I
> > was experiencing. What was the specific patch that fixed for it I was
> > wondering?
>
> It was http://patches.gluster.com/patch/664/. A less ugly fix is lined
> up for 2.1
>
>
> > Great job either way! It appears that with fuse 2.8 and newer kernels
> that
> > gluster absolutely flies. With a replication environment between two
> crummy
> > testbed machines it's probably about twice as fast as 2.7.4 based fuse!
>
> Just curious, are the observed performance improvements in terms of IO
> throughput or metadata latency?
>
> Avati
>
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.375 / Virus Database: 270.13.8/2224 - Release Date: 07/08/09
> 05:53:00
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://zresearch.com/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20090710/cd8cf0f7/attachment.htm>
