[Gluster-users] Gluster performance is paramount!

Vahric Muhtaryan vahric at doruk.net.tr
Sat Feb 25 09:16:28 UTC 2017

Hello Ernie , 

Actually why not really set it Raid0 also for mail server raid10 should be
fine , you can do it both .
Actually I m not real gluster user but just only tried for vm instances . I
find from blogs fro small io you should also care and tune about LOOKUP
One more actually I don¹t know how you are handling HA but with glusterfs
but I believe that if you are not using NFS Ganesha you have single point of
failure everytime , isn't it ?


From:  <gluster-users-bounces at gluster.org> on behalf of Ernie Dunbar
<maillist at lightspeed.ca>
Date:  Friday, 24 February 2017 at 22:36
To:  Gluster-users <gluster-users at gluster.org>
Subject:  **SPAM** [Gluster-users] Gluster performance is paramount!


Hi everyone!

We have a gluster array of three servers supporting a large mail server with
about 10,000 e-mail accounts with the Maildir file format. This means lots
of random small file reads and writes. Gluster's performance hasn't been
great since we switched to it from a local disk on a single server, but
we're aiming for high availability here, since simply restoring that mail
from backups (or even backing it up in the first place) takes a day or two.
Clearly, some kind of network drive is what we need, and Gluster does the
job better than every other solution we've looked at so far.

The problem comes from the fact that when I set out on this project, I'd
never done any kind of performance tuning before. We didn't need it. All
three of our Gluster servers are set up in a RAID5 array with a hot spare.
I'm starting to think that the performance woes we have all stem from this
fact, and speaking to one of my colleagues, it was suggested that Gluster
can handle the data integrity just fine on its own, so why don't we just
switch to the fastest possible type, RAID0 and completely toss out any data
integrity on each individual node in the cluster?

While this sounds good in theory, I'd like to know how well this works in
practice before subjecting our 10,000 e-mail clients to this experiment. The
other possibility is to switch our Gluster nodes to RAID1 or 10, which might
be faster than RAID5 while still keeping some semblance of data integrity.
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users at gluster.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20170225/0f1da4fe/attachment.html>

More information about the Gluster-users mailing list