On 29/02/16 15:25, Pavel Riha wrote:
Hi all,
I have read some recent post about performance issues, complaining
about the fuse driver and recomended NFS..
although my final goal is replicate volume, I'm now just doing some
test for reference.
my basic benchmark is
dd if=/dev/zero of=ddtest bs=1M count=1000 conv=fsync
running directly on server xfs partition give me 120-130 MB/s .. OK
on client NFS mount using _KERNEL_ nfs server give me 100-112MB/s .. OK
but a pure "nfs replacement" gluster config (one brick distribute)
give me sometimes 112 and sometimes only 64 !!! any idea why so
unstable?
I was watching top,iotop and iftop .. and no idea, the resources were
free
but the real problem comes with my second benchmark, untar the kernel
sources
tar xjf /usr/portage/distfiles/linux-3.2.tar.bz2
on server localy .. 16sec
kernel nfs mount .. 1:30
gluster nfs mount .. 23min !!! what???
is this the small files issue? so much? even on nfs?
my last quick test with gluster native (fuse) mount, give me
46MB/s for dd (really slow for non replicate) and
3:58 for the sources untar (not the best, but much much better than
gluster nfs)
I have done no tunning at all yet. But I thought I will get much
better numbers for the one brick distribute. And expected tuning with
the replica..
server is CPU E5-1650 v3 @ 3.50GHz with 4GB RAM, 7200rpm hdd
client is old i5 661 @ 3.33GHz, 4GB RAM
gigabit ethernet
glusterfs-3.7.4
XFS filesystem on brick partition
Can u provide more details about volume configuration (gluster vol info) ?
Pavel
_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
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
