[Gluster-devel] Potential impact of Cloudsync on posix performance

Susant Palai spalai at redhat.com
Thu Dec 19 06:01:53 UTC 2019

On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 7:00 PM Yaniv Kaul <ykaul at redhat.com> wrote:

> I'm looking at the code, and I'm seeing calls everywhere to
> posix_cs_maintenance().
> perhaps we should add to the volume configuration some boolean if
> cloudsync feature is even enabled for that volume?
> https://review.gluster.org/#/c/glusterfs/+/23576/ is a very modest effort
> to reduce the impact, but the real one should not be call these functions
> at all if cloud sync is not enabled.
> Thoughts?

Agreed. This was discussed before as well. The problem is that currently
there is no easy way to communicate client graph changes to server side(let
me know if I am wrong,I guess we faced similar problem in RIO as well).
The performance penalty without such medium is that we have a key check in
the dictionary(did I miss something else). I am of the opinion that it is
really not costly.


> Y.
> _______________________________________________
> Community Meeting Calendar:
> APAC Schedule -
> Every 2nd and 4th Tuesday at 11:30 AM IST
> Bridge: https://bluejeans.com/441850968
> NA/EMEA Schedule -
> Every 1st and 3rd Tuesday at 01:00 PM EDT
> Bridge: https://bluejeans.com/441850968
> Gluster-devel mailing list
> Gluster-devel at gluster.org
> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-devel/attachments/20191219/aba1ce8e/attachment.html>

More information about the Gluster-devel mailing list