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

[Sascha Ottolski]

Am Samstag 19 Januar 2008 11:03:43 schrieb Sascha Ottolski:
> 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?

now, another astonishing observation: if I enable the io-cache, it has a 
good effect for apache1 (almost doubles the requests/second), but 
almost none for apache2, nginx and lighttpd.

could this help to understand more about the performance differences?


Thanks, Sascha



>
> 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.h
>tml ?
>
>
> 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