[Gluster-users] Very slow directory listing and high CPU usage on replicated volume

Jonathan Lefman jonathan.lefman at essess.com
Fri Nov 2 17:21:22 UTC 2012

Thank you Brian. I'm happy to hear that this behavior is not typical. I am
now using xfs on all of my drives.  I also wiped out the entire
 /etc/glusterd directory for good measure.  I bet that there was residual
information from a previous attempt at a gluster volume that must have
caused problems.  Or moving to xfs from ext4 is an amazing fix, but I think
this is less likely.

I appreciate your time responding to me.

On Nov 2, 2012 4:44 AM, "Brian Candler" <B.Candler at pobox.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 08:03:21PM -0400, Jonathan Lefman wrote:
> >    Soon after loading up about 100 MB of small files (about 300kb each),
> >    the drive usage is at 1.1T.
> That is very odd. What do you get if you run du and df on the individual
> bricks themselves? 100MB is only ~330 files of 300KB each.
> Did you specify any special options to mkfs.ext4? Maybe -l 512 would help,
> as the xattrs are more likely to sit within the indoes themselves.
> If you start everything from scratch, it would be interesting to see df
> stats when the filesystem is empty.  It may be that a huge amount of space
> has been allocated to inodes.  If you expect most of your files >16KB then
> you could add -i 16384 to mkfs.ext4 to reduce the space reserved for
> inodes.
> But using xfs would be better, as it doesn't reserve any space for inodes,
> it allocates it dynamically.
> Ignore the comment that glusterfs is "not designed for handling large count
> small files" - 300KB is not small.
> Regards,
> Brian.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://supercolony.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20121102/a97e27dc/attachment.html>

More information about the Gluster-users mailing list