On 3 February 2017 at 11:09, Momonth <momonth@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi,
I ran some benchmarking on SSD enabled servers, 10Gb connected, see
the file attached.
I'm still looking at GlusterFS as a persistent storage for containers,
and it's clear it's not going to compete with local file system
performance.
Well that's kind of a given, with the standard rep 3, you're doing a sort of RAID 5 across the network. However depending on your use case & setup, you can get performance boosts akin to RAID 10 setups, multiplied bu the number of nodes/bricks in the cluster.
http://blog.gluster.org/category/performance/
https://s3.amazonaws.com/aws001/guided_trek/Performance_in_a_Gluster_Systemv6F.pdf
http://blog.gluster.org/category/performance/
https://s3.amazonaws.com/aws001/guided_trek/Performance_in_a_Gluster_Systemv6F.pdf
I couldn't find the particular doc, but I've seen some ludicrous throughputs from configs using multiple nodes running SSDs in RAID 10 and peering over Infiband.
D
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
