[Gluster-users] Gluster samba vfs read performance slow

[kane]

Hi Vijay

	I used the code in https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs.git with the lasted commit:  
commit de2a8d303311bd600cb93a775bc79a0edea1ee1a
Author: Anand Avati <avati at redhat.com>
Date:   Tue Sep 17 16:45:03 2013 -0700

    Revert "cluster/distribute: Rebalance should also verify free inodes"
    
    This reverts commit 215fea41a96479312a5ab8783c13b30ab9fe00fa
    
    Realized soon after merging, ….

which include the patch you mentioned last time improve read perf, written by Anand.

but the read perf was still slow:
write: 500MB/s
read: 77MB/s

while via fuse :
write 800MB/s
read 600MB/s

any advises?


Thank you.
-Kane

在 2013-9-13，下午10:37，kane <stef_9k at 163.com> 写道：

> Hi Vijay，
> 
> 	thank you for post this message, i will try it soon
> 
> -kane
> 
> 
> 
> 在 2013-9-13，下午9:21，Vijay Bellur <vbellur at redhat.com> 写道：
> 
>> On 09/13/2013 06:10 PM, kane wrote:
>>> Hi
>>> 
>>> We use gluster samba vfs test io,but the read performance via vfs is
>>> half of write perfomance,
>>> but via fuse the read and write performance is almost the same.
>>> 
>>> this is our smb.conf:
>>> [global]
>>>        workgroup = MYGROUP
>>>        server string = DCS Samba Server
>>>        log file = /var/log/samba/log.vfs
>>>        max log size = 500000
>>> #       use sendfile = true
>>>        aio read size = 262144
>>>        aio write size = 262144
>>>        aio write behind = true
>>>        min receivefile size = 262144
>>>        write cache size = 268435456
>>>        security = user
>>>        passdb backend = tdbsam
>>>        load printers = yes
>>>        cups options = raw
>>>        read raw = yes
>>>        write raw = yes
>>>        max xmit = 262144
>>>        socket options = TCP_NODELAY IPTOS_LOWDELAY SO_RCVBUF=262144
>>> SO_SNDBUF=262144
>>>        kernel oplocks = no
>>>        stat cache = no
>>> 
>>> any advises helpful?
>>> 
>> 
>> This patch has shown improvement in read performance with libgfapi:
>> 
>> http://review.gluster.org/#/c/5897/
>> 
>> Would it be possible for you to try this patch and check if it improves performance in your case?
>> 
>> -Vijay
>> 
>