It would be better to have the rails application files on the local disk and use the Gluster storage for images and other content that is uploaded. The main reason for this is that a single access on a rails application might result in the webserver having to read 20 small files. When you add up the network latency for each of those small file requests, it can increase the load time by quite a bit. -----Original Message----- From: gluster-users-bounces at gluster.org [mailto:gluster-users-bounces at gluster.org] On Behalf Of pkoelle Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 12:42 PM To: gluster-users at gluster.org Subject: Re: Way to improve GlusterFS performance for serving rails applications? Am 29.10.2010 18:23, schrieb Horacio Sanson: [ ... rails via gluster mount ....] Hi Horacio, > The questions: > > Am I doing something wrong or missing something or is this expected? I don't think you are doing something wrong. We tried the same (serving rails apps off of gluster mounts) and performance was terrible. Since there is no lock manager in gluster, the gluster client needs to check all server nodes when the file is accessed locally. This kills performance with many small files. cheers Paul -- this message was sent from my 7 years old Dell D800 _______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users at gluster.org http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
