[Gluster-devel] Re: webservers vs. glusterfs vs. namespace

[Sascha Ottolski]

Am Samstag 19 Januar 2008 13:25:55 schrieb Angel:
> Hi Sascha
>
> I have a few ideas you can try to figure out a bit more wahts
> happening
>
>
> Maybe there is locking on the apache as it traverses files.

Hi Angel,

thanks for you answer. Unfortunately, I'm not the one with the php 
performance problem, I was only suggesting that our problems _might_ be 
related.

For me, I'm only serving small static image files that live on a gluster 
mount. And find it strange and unexpected that apache1 outperforms 
apache2, nginx and lighttpd so significantly...

I will give the locks a try, as well as the trace xlator, but as I'm 
only reading I can't imagine how locks would make a difference.


Thanks, Sascha



>
> Asking the devels:
> Is locking implemented on files (posix-locks over posix-storage) or
> does unify locks also files on namespace? Are there any diferences on
> run with / without, posix-locks? Show the trace xlator locking
> activity?
>
> You said there are over 1700 files , are them php code and includes?
> How many files you estimate are implicated on php script execution?
> Maybe you are running out of file descriptors on some node..
>
>
> Try run a local only scenary without client/server, you can test cpu
> usage againts plain direct access or access via gluster mount point
>
> Also you ca trigger php script on cmd line to avoid apache
> singularities and focus un glusterfs vs plain filesystem
>
> This also applies in the network scenary, Apache vs non-Apache access
> would be very informational is they differ a lot
>
> Regards, Angel
>
> El Sábado, 19 de Enero de 2008 Sascha Ottolski escribió:
> > Am Freitag 18 Januar 2008 17:49:15 schrieb Anand Avati:
> > > Sascha,
> > >  the reason why 1.3.0pre4 might be faster would not be because of
> > > the missing namespace, but most likely because of missing
> > > self-heal. can you try with 'option self-heal off' in the unify
> > > section?
> >
> > may ask again, any idea why the old apache-1.3 performs way better
> > on either gluster version than the others? or any idea which knobs
> > to tweak to get more out of the others?
> >
> > usally, for static files from a local fileseystem, one would expect
> > that nginx and lighttpd would outperform the apaches
> > remarcably...may be my observations have a common cause with those
> > of
> > http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/gluster-devel/2008-01/msg00142
> >.html ?
> >
> >
> > Thanks a lot, Sascha
> >
> > > are the test results same for multiple runs too?
> > >
> > > avati
> > >
> > > 2008/1/18, Sascha Ottolski <ottolski at web.de>:
> > > > Hi Folks,
> > > >
> > > > I'm wondering if anyone might have some general advices if I
> > > > miss something important in my test setup. I'm trying to figure
> > > > out how to tweak the configs to achieve the best performance,
> > > > but get result that feel strange to me. I will post some
> > > > numbers at a later point, but up to now what I discovered is:
> > > >
> > > > - glusterfs without a namespace (1.3.0pre4) seems to be
> > > > significant faster than with namespace (tla patch-628)
> > > >
> > > > that seems to logical, at least I would expect some overhead
> > > > for the namespace.
> > > >
> > > > what i absolutely not understand is, how different the
> > > > webservers perform. i tested with
> > > >
> > > >     siege -f /tmp/siege-urls.txt.new -c100 -i -r50 -b
> > > >
> > > > with up to 3 sessions in parellel, each firing it's requests to
> > > > a seperate webserver (on seperate machines, of course).
> > > >
> > > > up to now my ranking by means of requests/per second is
> > > > something like
> > > >
> > > > 630 | apache
> > > > 430 | apache2 (worker)
> > > > 350 | nginx
> > > > 250 | lighttpd
> > > >
> > > > (with 1.3.0pre4 and no namespace, the best I've seen was
> > > > apache2 with about 900, apache still 750). I must admit that up
> > > > to now I did not compare it to local filesystem, but from my
> > > > past experiences with webservers I would expect nginx and
> > > > lighttpd way ahead of the apaches...
> > > >
> > > > Also, I exprimented a bit with different settings for
> > > > io-threads on the server (1, 2, 4, 8, and cache-size 64 or
> > > > 128MB), but that didn't seem to make much of a difference. Same
> > > > with read-ahead (which seems logical, as I test with relatively
> > > > small images).
> > > >
> > > > So far I did not try the booster. I use fuse-2.7.0-glfs7. I
> > > > also did not try the latest tla nor fuse-2.7.2-glfs8.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks a lot for any pointer,
> > > >
> > > > Sascha
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Gluster-devel mailing list
> > > > Gluster-devel at nongnu.org
> > > > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Gluster-devel mailing list
> > Gluster-devel at nongnu.org
> > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel