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

Gunnar gluster at akitogo.com
Tue Dec 11 09:10:32 UTC 2012


after testing for a while (after copying several 100000 files) it seems 
that either glusterfs or glusternfs is crashing under load.
The the average load on the machine goes up to 8 or 9, before it was max 
around 1, but there is no according process

I found a post which describes this behaviour:

So it could be that the load goes up after gluster nfs has crashed.

There is not much information in the nfs.log

[2012-12-05 21:02:18.035575] W 
[socket.c:1512:__socket_proto_state_machine] 0-gv01-client-1: reading 
from socket failed. Error (Transport endpoint is not connected), peer 
[2012-12-05 21:02:18.036141] I [client.c:2090:client_rpc_notify] 
0-gv01-client-1: disconnected
[2012-12-05 21:02:28.780956] E [socket.c:1715:socket_connect_finish] 
0-gv01-client-1: connection to 10.XXX.XXX.XXX:24009 failed (Connection 
[2012-12-05 21:19:41.217198] I [glusterfsd.c:1666:main] 
0-/usr/sbin/glusterfs: Started running /usr/sbin/glusterfs version 3.3.1
[2012-12-05 21:19:42.389196] I [nfs.c:821:init] 0-nfs: NFS service started
[2012-12-05 21:19:42.393121] W [graph.c:316:_log_if_unknown_option] 
0-nfs-server: option 'rpc-auth.auth-glusterfs' is not recognized
[2012-12-05 21:19:42.393180] W [graph.c:316:_log_if_unknown_option] 
0-nfs-server: option 'rpc-auth-allow-insecure' is not recognized
[2012-12-05 21:19:42.393212] W [graph.c:316:_log_if_unknown_option] 
0-nfs-server: option 'transport-type' is not recognized
[2012-12-05 21:19:42.393269] I [client.c:2142:notify] 0-gv01-client-0: 
parent translators are ready, attempting connect on transport
[2012-12-05 21:19:42.400269] I [client.c:2142:notify] 0-gv01-client-1: 
parent translators are ready, attempting connect on transport
Given volfile:

Just for anybody else, this is on Centos 6.3, Samba 3.6.10

I still don't know what causes this behaviour. If anybody has an idea 
how to fix it...



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

More information about the Gluster-users mailing list