[Gluster-users] Rebalance times in 3.2.5 vs 3.4.2

Vijay Bellur vbellur at redhat.com
Fri Feb 28 03:15:37 UTC 2014

On 02/28/2014 07:04 AM, Viktor Villafuerte wrote:
> Also I should add here that I'm doing this on VMs. However the rebalance
> with 3.2.5 was done on the same VMs
> v

Load on the VMs and hypervisors hosting the VMs could also have a 
bearing. Algorithmically we are much better than 3.2.5 in 3.4.2 and our 
practical experience also seems to corroborate that.

Has the amount of data involved in rebalancing changed since the last 
time this test was run?


> On Thu 27 Feb 2014 17:16:55, Viktor Villafuerte wrote:
>> Hi Shylesh,
>> yes the log showing files being processed and eventually the rebalance
>> completed (with skipped files) but it took much much longer than with
>> 3.2.5 which I tested intially.
>> v

More information about the Gluster-users mailing list