OK, I tweaked the virtualization parameters and now I have ~10 Gbit/s between all the nodes. $ iperf3 -c 10.13.1.16 Connecting to host 10.13.1.16, port 5201 [ 4] local 10.13.1.17 port 47242 connected to 10.13.1.16 port 5201 [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr Cwnd [ 4] 0.00-1.00 sec 1.42 GBytes 12.2 Gbits/sec 0 1.86 MBytes [ 4] 1.00-2.00 sec 1.54 GBytes 13.3 Gbits/sec 0 2.53 MBytes [ 4] 2.00-3.00 sec 1.37 GBytes 11.8 Gbits/sec 0 2.60 MBytes [ 4] 3.00-4.00 sec 1.25 GBytes 10.7 Gbits/sec 0 2.70 MBytes [ 4] 4.00-5.00 sec 1.30 GBytes 11.1 Gbits/sec 0 2.81 MBytes [ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 1.55 GBytes 13.3 Gbits/sec 0 2.86 MBytes [ 4] 6.00-7.00 sec 1.46 GBytes 12.6 Gbits/sec 0 2.92 MBytes [ 4] 7.00-8.00 sec 1.41 GBytes 12.1 Gbits/sec 0 2.97 MBytes [ 4] 8.00-9.00 sec 1.39 GBytes 12.0 Gbits/sec 0 2.98 MBytes [ 4] 9.00-10.00 sec 1.46 GBytes 12.5 Gbits/sec 0 3.00 MBytes - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr [ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 14.2 GBytes 12.2 Gbits/sec 0 sender [ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 14.1 GBytes 12.2 Gbits/sec receiver iperf Done. $ iperf3 -c 10.13.1.16 -R Connecting to host 10.13.1.16, port 5201 Reverse mode, remote host 10.13.1.16 is sending [ 4] local 10.13.1.17 port 47246 connected to 10.13.1.16 port 5201 [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth [ 4] 0.00-1.00 sec 1.63 GBytes 14.0 Gbits/sec [ 4] 1.00-2.00 sec 1.63 GBytes 14.0 Gbits/sec [ 4] 2.00-3.00 sec 1.56 GBytes 13.4 Gbits/sec [ 4] 3.00-4.00 sec 1.24 GBytes 10.7 Gbits/sec [ 4] 4.00-5.00 sec 1.51 GBytes 13.0 Gbits/sec [ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 1.40 GBytes 12.0 Gbits/sec [ 4] 6.00-7.00 sec 1.49 GBytes 12.8 Gbits/sec [ 4] 7.00-8.00 sec 1.58 GBytes 13.6 Gbits/sec [ 4] 8.00-9.00 sec 1.45 GBytes 12.4 Gbits/sec [ 4] 9.00-10.00 sec 1.47 GBytes 12.6 Gbits/sec - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr [ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 15.0 GBytes 12.9 Gbits/sec 0 sender [ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 15.0 GBytes 12.9 Gbits/sec receiver iperf Done. Looks good, right? Let's see the what it has given to us... $ for i in {1..5}; do { dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/tmp/test.tmp bs=1M count=10 oflag=sync; rm -f /mnt/tmp/test.tmp; } done 2>&1 | grep copied 10485760 bytes (10 MB) copied, 0.403512 s, 26.0 MB/s 10485760 bytes (10 MB) copied, 0.354702 s, 29.6 MB/s 10485760 bytes (10 MB) copied, 0.386806 s, 27.1 MB/s 10485760 bytes (10 MB) copied, 0.405671 s, 25.8 MB/s 10485760 bytes (10 MB) copied, 0.426986 s, 24.6 MB/s So, the network can do ~10 Gbit/s, the disk can do ~2 Gbit/s, the GlusterFS can do ~0.2 Gbit/s. Am I the only one so lucky? :-) Does anyone else observe the samephenomenon? On Wed, Jul 03, 2019 at 05:01:37PM -0400, Guy Boisvert wrote: > Yeah, 10 Gbps is affordable these days, even 25 Gbps! Wouldn't go lower than 10 Gbps. > > Get BlueMail for Android > > On Jul 3, 2019, 16:59, at 16:59, Marcus Schopen <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >Hi, > > > >Am Mittwoch, den 03.07.2019, 15:16 -0400 schrieb Dmitry Filonov: > >> Well, if your network is limited to 100MB/s then it doesn't matter if > >> storage is capable of doing 300+MB/s. > >> But 15 MB/s is still way less than 100 MB/s > > > >What network is recommended in the backend, 10 Gigabit or better more? > > > >Ciao! > >Marcus > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Gluster-users mailing list > >Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx > >https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users _______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users