[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gluster-devel] Full bore.
From: |
Anand Avati |
Subject: |
Re: [Gluster-devel] Full bore. |
Date: |
Fri, 16 Nov 2007 21:40:09 +0530 |
Your configuration doesnt seem to be what you want. do it someting like this
-
volume brick1
..
end-volume
volume write-behind
...
subvolume brick1
end-volume
volume read-ahead
...
subvolume write-behind
end-volume
volume server
...
auth.ip.read-ahead.allow *
subvolume read-ahead
end-volume
also can you post your client config?
avati
2007/11/16, Chris Johnson <address@hidden>:
>
> Ok, hi.
>
> I think I'm committing a major blunder here which may be why I'm
> not seeing better through put.
>
> These xlators should be stacked, is that right? I defined the
> following;
>
> volume brick1
> type storage/posix
> option directory /home/sdm1
> end-volume
>
> volume server
> type protocol/server
> subvolumes brick1
> option transport-type tcp/server # For TCP/IP transport
> # option client-volume-filename /etc/glusterfs/glusterfs-client.vol
> option auth.ip.brick1.allow *
> end-volume
>
> volume writebehind
> type performance/write-behind
> option aggregate-size 131072 # in bytes
> subvolumes brick1
> end-volume
>
> volume readahead
> type performance/read-ahead
> option page-size 65536 ### in bytes
> option page-count 16 ### memory cache size is page-count x page-size
> per file
> subvolumes brick1
> end-volume
>
> Should I have used the 'server' volume as the subvolume for read-ahead
> and write-behind in the above? Or should read-ahead and write-behind
> be between the basic brick and the server volume? Is there a
> diffrence in performance?
>
> I grabbed 5 volumes from the SATA Beast. I think the best way to
> test this is with the real files and jobs. So it's go for broke and
> full bore time.
>
> If I have two front ends I need I'll need the postix lock deal,
> the io threader is a must or why bother. If I unify, both front ends
> need access to the same namespace brick so it has to have locks on it
> too, yes?
>
> Looking at the GlusterFS Translators v1.3 server examples. Why
> is the io thread xlator so high up in the stack? Would it be better
> farther down that stack closer to the basic bricks? If not, why not?
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Chris Johnson |Internet: address@hidden
> Systems Administrator |Web:
> http://www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/~johnson
> NMR Center |Voice: 617.726.0949
> Mass. General Hospital |FAX: 617.726.7422
> 149 (2301) 13th Street |Knowing what thou knowest not
> Charlestown, MA., 02129 USA |is in a sence omniscience. Piet Hein
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>
--
It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account
Hofstadter's Law.
-- Hofstadter's Law
- Re: [Gluster-devel] Performance question., (continued)
- Re: [Gluster-devel] Performance question., Anand Avati, 2007/11/21
- Re: [Gluster-devel] Performance question., Chris Johnson, 2007/11/21
- Re: [Gluster-devel] Performance question., Anand Avati, 2007/11/21
- Re: [Gluster-devel] Performance question., Chris Johnson, 2007/11/21
- Re: [Gluster-devel] Performance question., Anand Avati, 2007/11/21
- Re: [Gluster-devel] Performance question., Kevan Benson, 2007/11/21
- [Gluster-devel] Re: AFR load-balancing, Székelyi Szabolcs, 2007/11/27
- Re: [Gluster-devel] Re: AFR load-balancing, Krishna Srinivas, 2007/11/27
- Re: [Gluster-devel] Full bore., Hans Einar Gautun, 2007/11/16
- Re: [Gluster-devel] Full bore., Chris Johnson, 2007/11/16
- Re: [Gluster-devel] Full bore.,
Anand Avati <=
- Re: [Gluster-devel] Full bore., Chris Johnson, 2007/11/16
- Re: [Gluster-devel] Full bore., Anand Avati, 2007/11/16
Re: [Gluster-devel] Full bore., Anand Avati, 2007/11/15