[Gluster-users] ec heal questions

[Serkan Çoban]

Is reading the good copies to construct the bad chunk is a parallel or
sequential operation?
Should I revert my 16+4 ec cluster to 8+2 because it takes nearly 7
days to heal just one broken 8TB disk which has only 800GB of data?

On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 1:56 PM, Ashish Pandey <aspandey at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Considering all the other factor same for both the configuration, yes small
> configuration
> would take less time. To read good copies, it will take less time.
>
> I think, multi threaded shd is the only enhancement in near future.
>
> Ashish
>
> ________________________________
> From: "Serkan Çoban" <cobanserkan at gmail.com>
> To: "Gluster Users" <gluster-users at gluster.org>
> Sent: Monday, August 8, 2016 4:02:22 PM
> Subject: [Gluster-users] ec heal questions
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Assume we have 8+2 and 16+4 ec configurations and we just replaced a
> broken disk in each configuration  which has 100GB of data. In which
> case heal completes faster? Does heal speed has anything related with
> ec configuration?
>
> Assume we are in 16+4 ec configuration. When heal starts it reads 16
> chunks from other bricks recompute our chunks and writes it to just
> replaced disk. Am I correct?
>
> If above assumption is true then small ec configurations heals faster right?
>
> Is there any improvements in 3.7.14+ that makes ec heal faster?(Other
> than multi-thread shd for ec)
>
> Thanks,
> Serkan
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users at gluster.org
> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>