QDR Infiniband has a max theoretical input of 40Gbits, or about 4GB/s. My LSI controller RAID controllers typically deliver about 0.5-1.0 GB/s for direct disk access. I have tested it many ways. I typically start jobs on many clients and measure the total network bandwidth on the servers by monitoring the totals in /proc/net/dev or just count the bytes on the clients. I can’t get more than about 300MB/s from each server. With a single job on a single client, I can’t get more than about 100-150MB/s. On Dec 7, 2014, at 9:15 PM, Franco Broi <franco.broi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Our theoretical peak throughput is about 4Gbytes/sec or 4 x 10Gbits/Sec, > you can see from the graph that the maximum recorded is 3.6GB/Sec. This > was probably during periods of large sequential IO. > > We have a small cluster of clients (10) with 10Gbit ethernet but the > majority of our machines (130) have gigabit. The throughput maximum for > the 10Gbit connected machines was just over 3GBytes/Sec with individual > machines recording about 800MB/Sec. > > We can easily saturate our 10Gbit links on the servers as each JBOD is > capable of better than 500MB/Sec but with mixed sequential/random access > it seems like a good compromise. > > We have another 2 server Gluster system with the same specs and we get > 1.8GB/Sec reads and 1.1GB/Sec writes. > > What are you using to measure your throughput? > > On Sun, 2014-12-07 at 20:52 -0500, Andrew Smith wrote: >> I have a similar system with 4 nodes and 2 bricks per node, where >> each brick is a single large filesystem (4TB x 24 RAID 6). The >> computers are all on QDR Infinband with Gluster using IPOIB. I >> have a cluster of Infiniband clients that access the data on the >> servers. I can only get about 1.0 to 1.2 GB/s throughput with my >> system though. Can you tell us the peak throughput that you are >> getting. I just don’t have a sense of what I should expect from >> my system. A similar Luster setup could achieve 2-3 GB/s, which >> I attributed to the fact that it didn’t use IPOIB, but instead used >> RDMA. I’d really like to know if I am wrong here and there is >> some configuration I can tweak to make things faster. >> >> Andy >> >> On Dec 7, 2014, at 8:43 PM, Franco Broi <franco.broi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, 2014-12-05 at 14:22 +0000, Kiebzak, Jason M. wrote: >>>> May I ask why you chose to go with 4 separate bricks per server rather than one large brick per server? >>> >>> Each brick is a JBOD with 16 disks running RAIDZ2. Just seemed more >>> logical to keep the bricks and ZFS filesystems confined to physical >>> hardware units, ie I could disconnect a brick and move it to another >>> server. >>> >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> Jason >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: gluster-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:gluster-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Franco Broi >>>> Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2014 7:56 PM >>>> To: gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx >>>> Subject: A year's worth of Gluster >>>> >>>> >>>> 1 DHT volume comprising 16 50TB bricks spread across 4 servers. Each server has 10Gbit Ethernet. >>>> >>>> Each brick is a ZOL RADIZ2 pool with a single filesystem. >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Gluster-users mailing list >>> Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx >>> http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users >> > > _______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
