[Gluster-users] gfs vs nfs: abysmal performance difference

[Raghavendra G]

Can you try with write-behind loaded on client side?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paolo Pisati" <paolo.pisati at tomato.it>
To: "Raghavendra G" <raghavendra at zresearch.com>
Cc: "Paolo Pisati" <paolo.pisati at contactlab.com>, gluster-users at gluster.org
Sent: Monday, May 25, 2009 1:50:39 PM GMT +04:00 Abu Dhabi / Muscat
Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] gfs vs nfs: abysmal performance difference

Raghavendra G wrote:
> Hi Paolo,
>
> what is the client and server configuration you are using?
the simplest you could think:

client:

volume client
  type protocol/client
  option transport-type tcp
option remote-host 10.0.0.1         # IP address of the remote brick
  option remote-subvolume brick        # name of the remote volume
end-volume

server:

volume posix
  type storage/posix
  option directory /usr/src
end-volume

volume locks
  type features/locks
  option mandatory-locks on
  subvolumes posix
end-volume

volume brick
  type performance/io-threads
  option thread-count 8
  subvolumes locks
end-volume

volume server
  type protocol/server
  option transport-type tcp
  option auth.addr.brick.allow 10.0.0.*
  subvolumes brick
end-volume



-- 

Paolo Pisati
Reparto Sistemi
---------
ContactLab
Via Natale Battaglia, 10
20127 Milano (Italy)
Tel. +39 02 28 31 181
Fax +39 02 70 03 02 69.
http://www.contactlab.com