Re: Gluster performance is paramount!

[Karan Sandha <ksandha@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Ernie,

For small-files, there are few tunables you would go for a good performance.

first stop the volume and then set the below parameters:-

gluster volume set <volname> cluster.lookup-optimize on

gluster volume set <volname> server.event-threads 4

gluster volume set <volname> client.event-threads 4

Start the volume and do a rebalance on the volume using :- gluster volume rebalance <volname> start ; check the status using the gluster volume rebalance <volname> status . you will be seeing a bump in performance of small files workload.

Thanks & Regards
Karan Sandha

On 02/25/2017 02:46 PM, Vahric Muhtaryan wrote:

Hello Ernie , 

Actually why not really set it Raid0 also for mail server raid10 should be fine , you can do it both .

Actually I m not real gluster user but just only tried for vm instances . I find from blogs fro small io you should also care and tune about LOOKUP issues

One more actually I don’t know how you are handling HA but with glusterfs but I believe that if you are not using NFS Ganesha you have single point of failure everytime , isn't it ? 

Regards

VM

From: <gluster-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Ernie Dunbar <maillist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Friday, 24 February 2017 at 22:36
To: Gluster-users <gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: **SPAM** [Gluster-users] Gluster performance is paramount!

Hi everyone!

We have a gluster array of three servers supporting a large mail server with about 10,000 e-mail accounts with the Maildir file format. This means lots of random small file reads and writes. Gluster's performance hasn't been great since we switched to it from a local disk on a single server, but we're aiming for high availability here, since simply restoring that mail from backups (or even backing it up in the first place) takes a day or two. Clearly, some kind of network drive is what we need, and Gluster does the job better than every other solution we've looked at so far.

The problem comes from the fact that when I set out on this project, I'd never done any kind of performance tuning before. We didn't need it. All three of our Gluster servers are set up in a RAID5 array with a hot spare. I'm starting to think that the performance woes we have all stem from this fact, and speaking to one of my colleagues, it was suggested that Gluster can handle the data integrity just fine on its own, so why don't we just switch to the fastest possible type, RAID0 and completely toss out any data integrity on each individual node in the cluster?

While this sounds good in theory, I'd like to know how well this works in practice before subjecting our 10,000 e-mail clients to this experiment. The other possibility is to switch our Gluster nodes to RAID1 or 10, which might be faster than RAID5 while still keeping some semblance of data integrity.

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

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

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