[Gluster-users] very bad performance on small files

Max Ivanov ivanov.maxim at gmail.com
Sun Jan 16 11:32:57 UTC 2011

>> > time tar cf - M | pv > /dev/null 15.8 MB/sec (native) 3.48MB/sec
>> > (FUSE) 254 Kb/sec (NFS)
> This test shows why glusterfs native protocol is better than NFS when you
> need to scale out storage. Even with a context switch overhead on the client
> side, glusterfs scores better due to the "clustered nature" of its protocol.
> NFS has to undergo a second hop when it has to fetch data not available in
> the server it has mounted from whereas for glusterfs it is always a single
> hop to any server it wants to get data from.

My tests was done on 2 bircks setup mounted in replica mode, thereby
all needed data was avaiable on NFS node and there was no need to do
additional hop.

More information about the Gluster-users mailing list