> As you are in replicate mode, all write will be send synchronously to all bricks, and in your case to a single hdd. I thought that every file will be sent to 2 bricks synchronously but if I write several files they are distributed between the three pairs of bricks. Therefore the performance should become better with more bricks (note that the 3×2 bricks are not final but only a test setup, more bricks will be added when going to production). > For sure I wouldn't go for 60+ users with this setup, maybe except if these hdd are ssd What would be a suitable setup? Or: Which use cases are typical for Gluster setups? Maybe I misunderstood the target of Gluster. Best regards Florian On 04.08.2015 07:25, Mathieu Chateau wrote: > Hello, > > As you are in replicate mode, all write will be send synchronously to > all bricks, and in your case to a single hdd. > > Writes: you are going to have same perf as 1 single hdd (best case > possible, you will have less) > read: all brick will be queried for metadata, one will send the file (if > I am correct) > > For sure I wouldn't go for 60+ users with this setup, maybe except if > these hdd are ssd > > just my 2 cents > > Cordialement, > Mathieu CHATEAU > http://www.lotp.fr > > 2015-08-03 23:29 GMT+02:00 Florian Oppermann <gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto:gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx>>: > > > If starting setup right now, you should start with current version (3.7.X) > > Is 3.7 stable? I have 60+ potential users and dont want to risk too > much. ;-) > > > Filesystem > > XFS partitions on all bricks > > > network type (lan, VM...) > > Gigabit LAN > > > where is client (same lan?) > > Yep > > > MTU > > 1500 > > > storage (raid, # of disks...) > > The bricks are all on separate servers. On each is a XFS partition on a > single HDD (together with other partitions for system etc.). All in all > there are currently seven machines involved. > > I just noticed that on all servers the > /var/log/glusterfs/etc-glusterfs-glusterd.vol.log is full of > messages like > > > [2015-08-03 21:24:59.879820] W [socket.c:620:__socket_rwv] > 0-management: readv on > /var/run/a91fc43b47272ffaace2a6989e7b5e85.socket failed (Invalid > argument) > > I assume this to be part of the problem… > > Regards :-) > Florian > > On 03.08.2015 22 <tel:03.08.2015%2022>:41, Mathieu Chateau wrote: > > Hello, > > > > If starting setup right now, you should start with current version (3.7.X) > > > > We need more data/context as you were able to feed 150GB before having > > issue. > > > > Info: > > Filesystem > > network type (lan, VM...) > > where is client (same lan?) > > MTU > > storage (raid, # of disks...) > > > > Cordialement, > > Mathieu CHATEAU > > http://www.lotp.fr > > > > 2015-08-03 21:44 GMT+02:00 Florian Oppermann <gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > <mailto:gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto:gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx>>>: > > > > Dear Gluster users, > > > > after setting up a distributed replicated volume (3x2 bricks) on gluster > > 3.6.4 on Ubuntu systems and populating it with some data (about 150 GB > > in 20k files) I experience extreme delay when navigating through > > directories or trying to ls the contents (actually the process seems to > > hang completely now until I kill the /usr/sbin/glusterfs process on the > > mounting machine). > > > > Is there some common misconfiguration or any performance tuning option > > that I could try? > > > > I mount via automount with fstype=glusterfs option (using the native > > fuse mount). > > > > Any tips? > > > > Best regards, > > Florian Oppermann > > _______________________________________________ > > Gluster-users mailing list > > Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx> > <mailto:Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx>> > > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users > > > > > > _______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
