Thanks for replying. Comments below. 2011/2/16 Luis Cerezo <lec at luiscerezo.org>: > is there a difference in speed between "ls" and /bin/ls ? ls on my root folder containing 999 sub folders takes about 5 minutes the first time I run ls. Then about a minute 15 seconds the following times. I guess caching comes into play. /bin/ls on the same root folder takes less than 2 seconds. Pretty significant change! > most linux systems have the pretty console colors, and there is an alias set > for ls to ls --color=tty. this make ls read extra attributes. this takes > forever on dirs with tons of files. if you do a long listing, it has to do > lookups against NIS/LDAP for uid info if you use directory services too. > how large are these files? > do you have atime on? do you need atime on? Bricks are mounted with noatime parameter, so atime should be disabled. > what are your bricks formatted as? ext3/4? Have you tuned them? My bricks are formatted as ext4. I have not really tuned them. I need some intelligence on how to tune them. > what is the network performance like outside of gluster? have you tested the > network with iperf etc? iperf on the production environment shows on average about 350-400 Mbps throughput. Regards Roland > hope this helps.. > -luis > On Feb 16, 2011, at 7:56 AM, Roland Rabben wrote: > > No answer to this at all? > > Regards > > Roland Rabben > > 2011/2/13 Roland Rabben <roland at jotta.no>: > > I have a few Glusterfs clusters. They are all running version 3.0.5. > > Both servers and clients are on Ubuntu 64 bit systems. > > My clusters are configured as Distributed and Replicated over Gigabit > > network. About 5 clients are reading and writing millions of files in > > all sizes to my filesystem. > > The volumes are exported using the fuse-based Glusterfs client. Volume > > size is usually 115 TB. > > I am experiencing performance degradation as the number of folders and > > files on my gluster filesystem grows. ?Running a simple command like > > ls can take minutes to complete. > > Cocurrent write performance is pretty poor. > > Is this performance degradation expected behavior? > > Are there any performance improvements related to concurrency and > > small files in Glusterfs 3.1? > > Any operating system or RAID configurations the community can > > recommend to help with performance? (We are mostly using Adaptec 5805 > > RAID controllers on or storage nodes.) > > > Best regards, > > Roland Rabben > > Founder & CEO Jotta AS > > Cell: +47 90 85 85 39 > > Phone: +47 21 04 29 00 > > Email: roland at jotta.no > > > > > -- > Roland Rabben > Founder & CEO Jotta AS > Cell: +47 90 85 85 39 > Phone: +47 21 04 29 00 > Email: roland at jotta.no > _______________________________________________ > Gluster-users mailing list > Gluster-users at gluster.org > http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users > > > Luis E. Cerezo > > http://www.luiscerezo.org > http://twitter.com/luiscerezo > http://flickr.com/photos/luiscerezo > Voice: 412 223 7396 > -- Roland Rabben Founder & CEO Jotta AS Cell: +47 90 85 85 39 Phone: +47 21 04 29 00 Email: roland at jotta.no
