Small correction, just recovered the machine which stopped accepting files yesterday night, the average load was 90!!! Am 11.12.2012 10:10, schrieb Gunnar: > Whit, > > after testing for a while (after copying several 100000 files) it > seems that either glusterfs or glusternfs is crashing under load. > The the average load on the machine goes up to 8 or 9, before it was > max around 1, but there is no according process > > I found a post which describes this behaviour: > http://serverfault.com/questions/365061/high-load-average-low-cpu-usage-why > > > So it could be that the load goes up after gluster nfs has crashed. > > There is not much information in the nfs.log > > [2012-12-05 21:02:18.035575] W > [socket.c:1512:__socket_proto_state_machine] 0-gv01-client-1: reading > from socket failed. Error (Transport endpoint is not connected), peer > (10.12.96.27:24009) > [2012-12-05 21:02:18.036141] I [client.c:2090:client_rpc_notify] > 0-gv01-client-1: disconnected > [2012-12-05 21:02:28.780956] E [socket.c:1715:socket_connect_finish] > 0-gv01-client-1: connection to 10.XXX.XXX.XXX:24009 failed (Connection > refused) > [2012-12-05 21:19:41.217198] I [glusterfsd.c:1666:main] > 0-/usr/sbin/glusterfs: Started running /usr/sbin/glusterfs version 3.3.1 > [2012-12-05 21:19:42.389196] I [nfs.c:821:init] 0-nfs: NFS service > started > [2012-12-05 21:19:42.393121] W [graph.c:316:_log_if_unknown_option] > 0-nfs-server: option 'rpc-auth.auth-glusterfs' is not recognized > [2012-12-05 21:19:42.393180] W [graph.c:316:_log_if_unknown_option] > 0-nfs-server: option 'rpc-auth-allow-insecure' is not recognized > [2012-12-05 21:19:42.393212] W [graph.c:316:_log_if_unknown_option] > 0-nfs-server: option 'transport-type' is not recognized > [2012-12-05 21:19:42.393269] I [client.c:2142:notify] 0-gv01-client-0: > parent translators are ready, attempting connect on transport > [2012-12-05 21:19:42.400269] I [client.c:2142:notify] 0-gv01-client-1: > parent translators are ready, attempting connect on transport > Given volfile: > +------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ > > > Just for anybody else, this is on Centos 6.3, Samba 3.6.10 > > I still don't know what causes this behaviour. If anybody has an idea > how to fix it... > > Thanks, > > Gunnar > > > Am 05.12.2012 14:33, schrieb Whit Blauvelt: >> Gunnar, >> >>> Second fastest is #1, nfs mount shared by Samba 4000 files in >>> around 6 min >>> Slowest is #2 where I need more than 12 min for 4000 files. >> Thanks for running that test. That's a significant difference. >> >> I wonder in the Samba > Gluster client > Gluster server scenario >> whether the >> slowness is the Gluster client transacting with both servers rather than >> just the local one. >> >> You've at least confirmed my suspicion that Samba > NFS > Gluster is >> not at >> any speed disadvantage. And in many months of running that way, as I >> said, >> there have been no performance complaints - although with this an >> unsupported configuration it could turn out we've just been lucky and >> that >> there's something yet that can go wrong. >> >> Whit > > _______________________________________________ > Gluster-users mailing list > Gluster-users at gluster.org > http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
