Is reading the good copies to construct the bad chunk is a parallel or sequential operation? Should I revert my 16+4 ec cluster to 8+2 because it takes nearly 7 days to heal just one broken 8TB disk which has only 800GB of data? On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 1:56 PM, Ashish Pandey <aspandey@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, > > Considering all the other factor same for both the configuration, yes small > configuration > would take less time. To read good copies, it will take less time. > > I think, multi threaded shd is the only enhancement in near future. > > Ashish > > ________________________________ > From: "Serkan Çoban" <cobanserkan@xxxxxxxxx> > To: "Gluster Users" <gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Monday, August 8, 2016 4:02:22 PM > Subject: ec heal questions > > > Hi, > > Assume we have 8+2 and 16+4 ec configurations and we just replaced a > broken disk in each configuration which has 100GB of data. In which > case heal completes faster? Does heal speed has anything related with > ec configuration? > > Assume we are in 16+4 ec configuration. When heal starts it reads 16 > chunks from other bricks recompute our chunks and writes it to just > replaced disk. Am I correct? > > If above assumption is true then small ec configurations heals faster right? > > Is there any improvements in 3.7.14+ that makes ec heal faster?(Other > than multi-thread shd for ec) > > Thanks, > Serkan > _______________________________________________ > 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
