On 28 Jul 2013, at 18:12, Anand Avati <anand.avati at gmail.com> wrote: > What is your typical workload, and what kind of tests did you compare native client perf against NFS perf? Low load, two web servers sharing a content area of < 500M. Even with a single client, performance with native client is slow, i.e. more than about 1 request/sec for a 100k image was enough to make the web server saturate iowait. NFS performance is not amazing, but it's definitely less bad (and there are lots of references in the list archives on NFS being better for small-file performance). Local disk only is orders of magnitude faster. I've not tested whether the performance has improved under 3.4, but frankly having it actually work reliably is more important. Marcus -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://supercolony.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20130728/b504f4cf/attachment.html>
