On Saturday 30 October 2010 05:00:40 Jacob Shucart wrote: > 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. > Thanks for the comment. I will then serve all dynamic content from the local disk and all static content (images, files, etc) from gluster mounted directly on the reverse proxy (nginx). thanks, > -----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 -- regards, Horacio Sanson
