Re: Very slow ls

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



You mention "cached results".
Is there any information about possible tweaks (e.g. caching, smb-modules,
etc) regarding directory listings in the GlusterFS docs?

At our institution (A/V archive), the speed of our current GlusterFS
installation (v3.4) has already received some complaints. So I'm also very
interested in anything possible to improve this.


Thanks in advance,
Pb


Am Mi, 5.08.2015, 20:02 schrieb Ben Turner:
> I am seeing a pretty big perf regression with ls -l on the 3.7 branch:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1250241
>
> Even when running on cached results I am not seeing what I saw on 3.6:
>
> total threads = 32
> total files = 316100
>  98.78% of requested files processed, minimum is  70.00
> 20.056840 sec elapsed time
> 15760.209342 files/sec
>
> In my 3.6 tests I was seeing 20k+ files per second uncached.
>
> -b


_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users



[Index of Archives]     [Gluster Development]     [Linux Filesytems Development]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux