[Gluster-users] Major performance problem with WRF

[Matt Lawrence]

Matt Lawrence wrote:
>> It is an unfair to compare clustered filesystems and local disk
>> filesystems directly. You can try a few optimizations - the io-threads
>> is pretty much useless on the client side in 1.4/2.0 branch (since the
>> introduction of non blocking sockets). You can remove read-ahead too
>> since I understand your IO pattern largely involves random IO, and for
>> sequential IO glusterfs can achieve link max speed on Gig/E even
>> without read-ahead. After these changes you might also want to try
>> with and without write-behind because these performance translators
>> are meant to be used with streaming IO.
>>   
>>     
>
> WRF is not the only thing running on the cluster.
>
> Direct I/O of 1GB takes 2.7 seconds.  NFS takes 17 seconds.  Gluster 
> takes 100 seconds.
>   

Pulled those translators out and it reduced the glusterfs time to 77 
seconds.  A significant improvement, but still far behind NFS.  Any 
other suggestions?


-- Matt