[Gluster-users] Interesting experiment

[Hiren Joshi]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Liam Slusser [mailto:lslusser at gmail.com] 
> Sent: 18 August 2009 18:51
> To: Hiren Joshi
> Cc: gluster-users at gluster.org
> Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] Interesting experiment
> 
> On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 3:05 AM, Hiren 
> Joshi<josh at moonfruit.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Ok, the basic setup is 6 bricks per server, 2 servers. 
> Mirror the six
> > bricks and DHT them.
> >
> > I'm running three tests, dd 1G of zeros to the gluster 
> mount, dd 1000
> > 100k files and dd 1000 1M files.
> >
> > With 3M write-behind I get:
> > 0m35.460s for 1G file
> > 0m52.427s for 100k files
> > 1m37.209s for 1M files
> >
> > Then I added a 400M external journal to all the bricks, the 
> twist being
> > the journals were made on a ram drive....
> >
> > Running the same tests:
> > 0m33.614s for 1G file
> > 0m52.851s for 100k files
> > 1m31.693s for 1M files
> >
> >
> > So why is it that adding an external journal (in the ram!) 
> seems to make
> > no difference at all?
> 
> I would imagine that most of your bottle neck is with the network and
> not the disks.  Modern raid disk storage systems are much quicker than
> gigabit ethernet.

You're right, the raid gives me great (SSD type) performance!

This is interesting, I'm on a gigabit network and it looks like it's
maxing out....

when I dd a 1Gig file:
about 180000 kbits/sec
When I dd 1000 1M files:
about 80000 kbits/sec

Is it worth bonding? This look like I'm maxing out the network
connection.

> 
> liam
>