On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 15:02:34 +0200 Martin Reissner <mreissner at wavecon.de> wrote: > [...] > NFS: > write: 74s > read: 36s > > GlusterFS 1 Server: > write: 332s > read: 59s > > GlusterFS 2 Servers with Distribute: > write: 331s > read: 60s Can you produce the same test for replicate, too? A really interesting setup for people who want to get rid of NFS... In theory the minimum time (caused by a FE network) should be below 23s for read and write or maybe 46s for replicate write case. I know you have GBit ethernet, but your disks won't cope with that anyway, so one would be content with a factor 2 in real life. Nevertheless your test really shows that NFS is not that bad. A local-disk FUSE fs would be an interesting comparison, too. -- Regards, Stephan
