[Gluster-users] CIFS options - anyone done A-B comparisons on various setups?

[Gunnar]

Whit,

> I wonder in the Samba > Gluster client > Gluster server scenario 
> whether the
> slowness is the Gluster client transacting with both servers rather than
> just the local one.

I tested a reboot inbeween, so just one server stayed online and I 
didn't see much changes in
the throughput. I tried to play around with the translators and I 
could't get any significant increase
or decrease.

Samba on a local volume is much faster (I messed one test up and was so 
happy about the transfer rates
and realized afterwards that samba used a local disc).

Gunnar

Am 05.12.2012 14:33, schrieb Whit Blauvelt:
> Gunnar,
>
>> Second fastest is #1,  nfs mount shared by Samba 4000 files in around 6 min
>> Slowest is #2  where I need more than 12 min for 4000 files.
> Thanks for running that test. That's a significant difference.
>
> I wonder in the Samba > Gluster client > Gluster server scenario whether the
> slowness is the Gluster client transacting with both servers rather than
> just the local one.
>
> You've at least confirmed my suspicion that Samba > NFS > Gluster is not at
> any speed disadvantage. And in many months of running that way, as I said,
> there have been no performance complaints - although with this an
> unsupported configuration it could turn out we've just been lucky and that
> there's something yet that can go wrong.
>
> Whit