Re: [Gluster-devel] GlusterFS performance for random file acess

[Grigory Shamov]

Dear Amar,

Thank you for the advice.

(Actually, I used byte units, like, 16384 for 16KB)

The thing is, 128KB page-size, while gives full throughput, seems to 
kill Rewrite completely, as one could see from the Table down below in 
the quote. There I used page-size 128KB and page-count of 2.

--
Best regards,
Grigory Shamov
Kazan Science Centre of RAS,
Kazan, Russian Federation


Amar wrote:
> Hi,
>  With read-ahead 'option page-size 16kB' you may not achieve maximum
> throughput, so, better try 'option page-size 128kB' (Note that 16K is just
> treated as 16bytes, as the parser needs 'KB' 'MB' 'GB' as the unit, not K,
> M, or G respectively).
>
> Regards,
> Amar



> On Dec 19, 2007 10:56 PM, Grigory Shamov <address@hidden> wrote:
> > Dear GlusterFS developers,
Some of the Bonnie++ results are
> > like this:
> >
> > ===============================================
> >   FileSystem:     Sequential Output , K/sec
> >                   Per-char    Block     Rewrite
> > ===============================================
> >   NFS               14442      30419      7710
> >   Lustre            16012      35228     19018
> >   GlusterFS         16582      15833      8358
> >   GlusterFS, wb     17988      43774      8409
> >   GlusterFS, ra     18414      15863      1804
> >   GlusterFS, ra, wb 22403      41821       355
> > ===============================================
> > FileSystem:     Sequential Input, K/sec Random
> >                   Per-char    Block      seeks, #/s
> > ===============================================
> >   NFS               20229      49510      178.8
> >   Lustre            17284      47753       53.0
> >   GlusterFS         16791      16815      161.4
> >   GlusterFS, wb     15304      17438      174.1
> >   GlusterFS, ra     19420      54803      143.3
> >   GlusterFS, ra, wb 19900      54427      144.4
> > ===============================================