[Gluster-users] Gluster performance on the small files

[Samuli Heinonen]

Hi!

What image type you are using to store virtual machines? For example using sparse QCOW2 images is much slower than preallocated RAW images. Performance with QCOW2 should get better after image file has grown bigger and it's not necessary to resize sparse image anymore.

Best regards,
Samuli Heinonen

 
On 13.2.2015, at 8.58, Punit Dambiwal <hypunit at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I have seen the gluster performance is dead slow on the small files...even i am using the SSD....it's too bad performance....even i am getting better performance in my SAN with normal SATA disk...
> 
> I am using distributed replicated glusterfs with replica count=2...i have all SSD disks on the brick...
> 
> root at vm3:~# dd bs=64k count=4k if=/dev/zero of=test oflag=dsync
> 
> 4096+0 records in
> 
> 4096+0 records out
> 
> 268435456 bytes (268 MB) copied, 57.3145 s, 4.7 MB/s
> 
> 
> 
> root at vm3:~# dd bs=64k count=4k if=/dev/zero of=test conv=fdatasync
> 
> 4096+0 records in
> 
> 4096+0 records out
> 
> 268435456 bytes (268 MB) copied, 1.80093 s, 149 MB/s
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Punit
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users at gluster.org
> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20150214/f4c95e16/attachment.html>