[Gluster-users] Slow write times to gluster disk
Pranith Kumar Karampuri
pkarampu at redhat.com
Sat Jun 24 05:43:53 UTC 2017
On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri <
pkarampu at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 2:23 AM, Pat Haley <phaley at mit.edu> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Today we experimented with some of the FUSE options that we found in the
>> list.
>>
>> Changing these options had no effect:
>>
>> gluster volume set test-volume performance.cache-max-file-size 2MB
>> gluster volume set test-volume performance.cache-refresh-timeout 4
>> gluster volume set test-volume performance.cache-size 256MB
>> gluster volume set test-volume performance.write-behind-window-size 4MB
>> gluster volume set test-volume performance.write-behind-window-size 8MB
>>
>>
> This is a good coincidence, I am meeting with write-behind
> maintainer(+Raghavendra G) today for the same doubt. I think we will have
> something by EOD IST. I will update you.
>
Sorry, forgot to update you. It seems like there is a bug in Write-behind
and Facebook guys sent a patch http://review.gluster.org/16079 to fix the
same. But even with that I am not seeing any improvement. May be I am doing
something wrong. Will update you if I find anything more.
> Changing the following option from its default value made the speed slower
>>
>> gluster volume set test-volume performance.write-behind off (on by default)
>>
>> Changing the following options initially appeared to give a 10% increase
>> in speed, but this vanished in subsequent tests (we think the apparent
>> increase may have been to a lighter workload on the computer from other
>> users)
>>
>> gluster volume set test-volume performance.stat-prefetch on
>> gluster volume set test-volume client.event-threads 4
>> gluster volume set test-volume server.event-threads 4
>>
>> Can anything be gleaned from these observations? Are there other things
>> we can try?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Pat
>>
>>
>>
>> On 06/20/2017 12:06 PM, Pat Haley wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi Ben,
>>
>> Sorry this took so long, but we had a real-time forecasting exercise last
>> week and I could only get to this now.
>>
>> Backend Hardware/OS:
>>
>> - Much of the information on our back end system is included at the
>> top of http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/2017-April/
>> 030529.html
>> - The specific model of the hard disks is SeaGate ENTERPRISE CAPACITY
>> V.4 6TB (ST6000NM0024). The rated speed is 6Gb/s.
>> - Note: there is one physical server that hosts both the NFS and the
>> GlusterFS areas
>>
>> Latest tests
>>
>> I have had time to run the tests for one of the dd tests you requested to
>> the underlying XFS FS. The median rate was 170 MB/s. The dd results and
>> iostat record are in
>>
>> http://mseas.mit.edu/download/phaley/GlusterUsers/TestXFS/
>>
>> I'll add tests for the other brick and to the NFS area later.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Pat
>>
>>
>> On 06/12/2017 06:06 PM, Ben Turner wrote:
>>
>> Ok you are correct, you have a pure distributed volume. IE no replication overhead. So normally for pure dist I use:
>>
>> throughput = slowest of disks / NIC * .6-.7
>>
>> In your case we have:
>>
>> 1200 * .6 = 720
>>
>> So you are seeing a little less throughput than I would expect in your configuration. What I like to do here is:
>>
>> -First tell me more about your back end storage, will it sustain 1200 MB / sec? What kind of HW? How many disks? What type and specs are the disks? What kind of RAID are you using?
>>
>> -Second can you refresh me on your workload? Are you doing reads / writes or both? If both what mix? Since we are using DD I assume you are working iwth large file sequential I/O, is this correct?
>>
>> -Run some DD tests on the back end XFS FS. I normally have /xfs-mount/gluster-brick, if you have something similar just mkdir on the XFS -> /xfs-mount/my-test-dir. Inside the test dir run:
>>
>> If you are focusing on a write workload run:
>>
>> # dd if=/dev/zero of=/xfs-mount/file bs=1024k count=10000 conv=fdatasync
>>
>> If you are focusing on a read workload run:
>>
>> # echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
>> # dd if=/gluster-mount/file of=/dev/null bs=1024k count=10000
>>
>> ** MAKE SURE TO DROP CACHE IN BETWEEN READS!! **
>>
>> Run this in a loop similar to how you did in:
>> http://mseas.mit.edu/download/phaley/GlusterUsers/TestVol/dd_testvol_gluster.txt
>>
>> Run this on both servers one at a time and if you are running on a SAN then run again on both at the same time. While this is running gather iostat for me:
>>
>> # iostat -c -m -x 1 > iostat-$(hostname).txt
>>
>> Lets see how the back end performs on both servers while capturing iostat, then see how the same workload / data looks on gluster.
>>
>> -Last thing, when you run your kernel NFS tests are you using the same filesystem / storage you are using for the gluster bricks? I want to be sure we have an apples to apples comparison here.
>>
>> -b
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>
>> From: "Pat Haley" <phaley at mit.edu> <phaley at mit.edu>
>> To: "Ben Turner" <bturner at redhat.com> <bturner at redhat.com>
>> Sent: Monday, June 12, 2017 5:18:07 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] Slow write times to gluster disk
>>
>>
>> Hi Ben,
>>
>> Here is the output:
>>
>> [root at mseas-data2 ~]# gluster volume info
>>
>> Volume Name: data-volume
>> Type: Distribute
>> Volume ID: c162161e-2a2d-4dac-b015-f31fd89ceb18
>> Status: Started
>> Number of Bricks: 2
>> Transport-type: tcp
>> Bricks:
>> Brick1: mseas-data2:/mnt/brick1
>> Brick2: mseas-data2:/mnt/brick2
>> Options Reconfigured:
>> nfs.exports-auth-enable: on
>> diagnostics.brick-sys-log-level: WARNING
>> performance.readdir-ahead: on
>> nfs.disable: on
>> nfs.export-volumes: off
>>
>>
>> On 06/12/2017 05:01 PM, Ben Turner wrote:
>>
>> What is the output of gluster v info? That will tell us more about your
>> config.
>>
>> -b
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>
>> From: "Pat Haley" <phaley at mit.edu> <phaley at mit.edu>
>> To: "Ben Turner" <bturner at redhat.com> <bturner at redhat.com>
>> Sent: Monday, June 12, 2017 4:54:00 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] Slow write times to gluster disk
>>
>>
>> Hi Ben,
>>
>> I guess I'm confused about what you mean by replication. If I look at
>> the underlying bricks I only ever have a single copy of any file. It
>> either resides on one brick or the other (directories exist on both
>> bricks but not files). We are not using gluster for redundancy (or at
>> least that wasn't our intent). Is that what you meant by replication
>> or is it something else?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Pat
>>
>> On 06/12/2017 04:28 PM, Ben Turner wrote:
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>
>> From: "Pat Haley" <phaley at mit.edu> <phaley at mit.edu>
>> To: "Ben Turner" <bturner at redhat.com> <bturner at redhat.com>, "Pranith Kumar Karampuri"<pkarampu at redhat.com> <pkarampu at redhat.com>
>> Cc: "Ravishankar N" <ravishankar at redhat.com> <ravishankar at redhat.com>, gluster-users at gluster.org,
>> "Steve Postma" <SPostma at ztechnet.com> <SPostma at ztechnet.com>
>> Sent: Monday, June 12, 2017 2:35:41 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] Slow write times to gluster disk
>>
>>
>> Hi Guys,
>>
>> I was wondering what our next steps should be to solve the slow write
>> times.
>>
>> Recently I was debugging a large code and writing a lot of output at
>> every time step. When I tried writing to our gluster disks, it was
>> taking over a day to do a single time step whereas if I had the same
>> program (same hardware, network) write to our nfs disk the time per
>> time-step was about 45 minutes. What we are shooting for here would be
>> to have similar times to either gluster of nfs.
>>
>> I can see in your test:
>> http://mseas.mit.edu/download/phaley/GlusterUsers/TestVol/dd_testvol_gluster.txt
>>
>> You averaged ~600 MB / sec(expected for replica 2 with 10G, {~1200 MB /
>> sec} / #replicas{2} = 600). Gluster does client side replication so with
>> replica 2 you will only ever see 1/2 the speed of your slowest part of
>> the
>> stack(NW, disk, RAM, CPU). This is usually NW or disk and 600 is
>> normally
>> a best case. Now in your output I do see the instances where you went
>> down to 200 MB / sec. I can only explain this in three ways:
>>
>> 1. You are not using conv=fdatasync and writes are actually going to
>> page
>> cache and then being flushed to disk. During the fsync the memory is not
>> yet available and the disks are busy flushing dirty pages.
>> 2. Your storage RAID group is shared across multiple LUNS(like in a SAN)
>> and when write times are slow the RAID group is busy serviceing other
>> LUNs.
>> 3. Gluster bug / config issue / some other unknown unknown.
>>
>> So I see 2 issues here:
>>
>> 1. NFS does in 45 minutes what gluster can do in 24 hours.
>> 2. Sometimes your throughput drops dramatically.
>>
>> WRT #1 - have a look at my estimates above. My formula for guestimating
>> gluster perf is: throughput = NIC throughput or storage(whatever is
>> slower) / # replicas * overhead(figure .7 or .8). Also the larger the
>> record size the better for glusterfs mounts, I normally like to be at
>> LEAST 64k up to 1024k:
>>
>> # dd if=/dev/zero of=/gluster-mount/file bs=1024k count=10000
>> conv=fdatasync
>>
>> WRT #2 - Again, I question your testing and your storage config. Try
>> using
>> conv=fdatasync for your DDs, use a larger record size, and make sure that
>> your back end storage is not causing your slowdowns. Also remember that
>> with replica 2 you will take ~50% hit on writes because the client uses
>> 50% of its bandwidth to write to one replica and 50% to the other.
>>
>> -b
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Pat
>>
>>
>> On 06/02/2017 01:07 AM, Ben Turner wrote:
>>
>> Are you sure using conv=sync is what you want? I normally use
>> conv=fdatasync, I'll look up the difference between the two and see if
>> it
>> affects your test.
>>
>>
>> -b
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>
>> From: "Pat Haley" <phaley at mit.edu> <phaley at mit.edu>
>> To: "Pranith Kumar Karampuri" <pkarampu at redhat.com> <pkarampu at redhat.com>
>> Cc: "Ravishankar N" <ravishankar at redhat.com> <ravishankar at redhat.com>,gluster-users at gluster.org,
>> "Steve Postma" <SPostma at ztechnet.com> <SPostma at ztechnet.com>, "Ben
>> Turner" <bturner at redhat.com> <bturner at redhat.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 9:40:34 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] Slow write times to gluster disk
>>
>>
>> Hi Pranith,
>>
>> The "dd" command was:
>>
>> dd if=/dev/zero count=4096 bs=1048576 of=zeros.txt conv=sync
>>
>> There were 2 instances where dd reported 22 seconds. The output from
>> the
>> dd tests are in
>> http://mseas.mit.edu/download/phaley/GlusterUsers/TestVol/dd_testvol_gluster.txt
>>
>> Pat
>>
>> On 05/30/2017 09:27 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
>>
>> Pat,
>> What is the command you used? As per the following output,
>> it
>> seems like at least one write operation took 16 seconds. Which is
>> really bad.
>> 96.39 1165.10 us 89.00 us*16487014.00 us*
>> 393212
>> WRITE
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 10:36 PM, Pat Haley <phaley at mit.edu<mailto:phaley at mit.edu> <phaley at mit.edu>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi Pranith,
>>
>> I ran the same 'dd' test both in the gluster test volume and
>> in
>> the .glusterfs directory of each brick. The median results
>> (12
>> dd
>> trials in each test) are similar to before
>>
>> * gluster test volume: 586.5 MB/s
>> * bricks (in .glusterfs): 1.4 GB/s
>>
>> The profile for the gluster test-volume is in
>>
>> http://mseas.mit.edu/download/phaley/GlusterUsers/TestVol/profile_testvol_gluster.txt
>> <http://mseas.mit.edu/download/phaley/GlusterUsers/TestVol/profile_testvol_gluster.txt> <http://mseas.mit.edu/download/phaley/GlusterUsers/TestVol/profile_testvol_gluster.txt>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Pat
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 05/30/2017 12:10 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
>>
>> Let's start with the same 'dd' test we were testing with to
>> see,
>> what the numbers are. Please provide profile numbers for the
>> same. From there on we will start tuning the volume to see
>> what
>> we can do.
>>
>> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 9:16 PM, Pat Haley <phaley at mit.edu
>> <mailto:phaley at mit.edu> <phaley at mit.edu>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi Pranith,
>>
>> Thanks for the tip. We now have the gluster volume
>> mounted
>> under /home. What tests do you recommend we run?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Pat
>>
>>
>>
>> On 05/17/2017 05:01 AM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 9:20 PM, Pat Haley
>> <phaley at mit.edu
>> <mailto:phaley at mit.edu> <phaley at mit.edu>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi Pranith,
>>
>> Sorry for the delay. I never saw received your
>> reply
>> (but I did receive Ben Turner's follow-up to your
>> reply). So we tried to create a gluster volume
>> under
>> /home using different variations of
>>
>> gluster volume create test-volume
>> mseas-data2:/home/gbrick_test_1
>> mseas-data2:/home/gbrick_test_2 transport tcp
>>
>> However we keep getting errors of the form
>>
>> Wrong brick type: transport, use
>> <HOSTNAME>:<export-dir-abs-path>
>>
>> Any thoughts on what we're doing wrong?
>>
>>
>> You should give transport tcp at the beginning I think.
>> Anyways, transport tcp is the default, so no need to
>> specify
>> so remove those two words from the CLI.
>>
>>
>> Also do you have a list of the test we should be
>> running
>> once we get this volume created? Given the
>> time-zone
>> difference it might help if we can run a small
>> battery
>> of tests and post the results rather than
>> test-post-new
>> test-post... .
>>
>>
>> This is the first time I am doing performance analysis
>> on
>> users as far as I remember. In our team there are
>> separate
>> engineers who do these tests. Ben who replied earlier is
>> one
>> such engineer.
>>
>> Ben,
>> Have any suggestions?
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Pat
>>
>>
>>
>> On 05/11/2017 12:06 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri
>> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 9:32 PM, Pat Haley
>> <phaley at mit.edu <mailto:phaley at mit.edu> <phaley at mit.edu>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi Pranith,
>>
>> The /home partition is mounted as ext4
>> /home ext4 defaults,usrquota,grpquota 1 2
>>
>> The brick partitions are mounted ax xfs
>> /mnt/brick1 xfs defaults 0 0
>> /mnt/brick2 xfs defaults 0 0
>>
>> Will this cause a problem with creating a
>> volume
>> under /home?
>>
>>
>> I don't think the bottleneck is disk. You can do
>> the
>> same tests you did on your new volume to confirm?
>>
>>
>> Pat
>>
>>
>>
>> On 05/11/2017 11:32 AM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri
>> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 8:57 PM, Pat Haley
>> <phaley at mit.edu <mailto:phaley at mit.edu> <phaley at mit.edu>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi Pranith,
>>
>> Unfortunately, we don't have similar
>> hardware
>> for a small scale test. All we have is
>> our
>> production hardware.
>>
>>
>> You said something about /home partition which
>> has
>> lesser disks, we can create plain distribute
>> volume inside one of those directories. After
>> we
>> are done, we can remove the setup. What do you
>> say?
>>
>>
>> Pat
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 05/11/2017 07:05 AM, Pranith Kumar
>> Karampuri wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 2:48 AM, Pat
>> Haley
>> <phaley at mit.edu <mailto:phaley at mit.edu> <phaley at mit.edu>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi Pranith,
>>
>> Since we are mounting the partitions
>> as
>> the bricks, I tried the dd test
>> writing
>> to
>> <brick-path>/.glusterfs/<file-to-be-removed-after-test>.
>> The results without oflag=sync were
>> 1.6
>> Gb/s (faster than gluster but not as
>> fast
>> as I was expecting given the 1.2 Gb/s
>> to
>> the no-gluster area w/ fewer disks).
>>
>>
>> Okay, then 1.6Gb/s is what we need to
>> target
>> for, considering your volume is just
>> distribute. Is there any way you can do
>> tests
>> on similar hardware but at a small scale?
>> Just so we can run the workload to learn
>> more
>> about the bottlenecks in the system? We
>> can
>> probably try to get the speed to 1.2Gb/s
>> on
>> your /home partition you were telling me
>> yesterday. Let me know if that is
>> something
>> you are okay to do.
>>
>>
>> Pat
>>
>>
>>
>> On 05/10/2017 01:27 PM, Pranith Kumar
>> Karampuri wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 10:15 PM,
>> Pat
>> Haley <phaley at mit.edu
>> <mailto:phaley at mit.edu> <phaley at mit.edu>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi Pranith,
>>
>> Not entirely sure (this isn't my
>> area of expertise). I'll run
>> your
>> answer by some other people who
>> are
>> more familiar with this.
>>
>> I am also uncertain about how to
>> interpret the results when we
>> also
>> add the dd tests writing to the
>> /home area (no gluster, still on
>> the
>> same machine)
>>
>> * dd test without oflag=sync
>> (rough average of multiple
>> tests)
>> o gluster w/ fuse mount :
>> 570
>> Mb/s
>> o gluster w/ nfs mount:
>> 390
>> Mb/s
>> o nfs (no gluster): 1.2
>> Gb/s
>> * dd test with oflag=sync
>> (rough
>> average of multiple tests)
>> o gluster w/ fuse mount:
>> 5
>> Mb/s
>> o gluster w/ nfs mount:
>> 200
>> Mb/s
>> o nfs (no gluster): 20
>> Mb/s
>>
>> Given that the non-gluster area
>> is
>> a
>> RAID-6 of 4 disks while each
>> brick
>> of the gluster area is a RAID-6
>> of
>> 32 disks, I would naively expect
>> the
>> writes to the gluster area to be
>> roughly 8x faster than to the
>> non-gluster.
>>
>>
>> I think a better test is to try and
>> write to a file using nfs without
>> any
>> gluster to a location that is not
>> inside
>> the brick but someother location
>> that
>> is
>> on same disk(s). If you are mounting
>> the
>> partition as the brick, then we can
>> write to a file inside .glusterfs
>> directory, something like
>> <brick-path>/.glusterfs/<file-to-be-removed-after-test>.
>>
>>
>>
>> I still think we have a speed
>> issue,
>> I can't tell if fuse vs nfs is
>> part
>> of the problem.
>>
>>
>> I got interested in the post because
>> I
>> read that fuse speed is lesser than
>> nfs
>> speed which is counter-intuitive to
>> my
>> understanding. So wanted
>> clarifications.
>> Now that I got my clarifications
>> where
>> fuse outperformed nfs without sync,
>> we
>> can resume testing as described
>> above
>> and try to find what it is. Based on
>> your email-id I am guessing you are
>> from
>> Boston and I am from Bangalore so if
>> you
>> are okay with doing this debugging
>> for
>> multiple days because of timezones,
>> I
>> will be happy to help. Please be a
>> bit
>> patient with me, I am under a
>> release
>> crunch but I am very curious with
>> the
>> problem you posted.
>>
>> Was there anything useful in the
>> profiles?
>>
>>
>> Unfortunately profiles didn't help
>> me
>> much, I think we are collecting the
>> profiles from an active volume, so
>> it
>> has a lot of information that is not
>> pertaining to dd so it is difficult
>> to
>> find the contributions of dd. So I
>> went
>> through your post again and found
>> something I didn't pay much
>> attention
>> to
>> earlier i.e. oflag=sync, so did my
>> own
>> tests on my setup with FUSE so sent
>> that
>> reply.
>>
>>
>> Pat
>>
>>
>>
>> On 05/10/2017 12:15 PM, Pranith
>> Kumar Karampuri wrote:
>>
>> Okay good. At least this
>> validates
>> my doubts. Handling O_SYNC in
>> gluster NFS and fuse is a bit
>> different.
>> When application opens a file
>> with
>> O_SYNC on fuse mount then each
>> write syscall has to be written
>> to
>> disk as part of the syscall
>> where
>> as in case of NFS, there is no
>> concept of open. NFS performs
>> write
>> though a handle saying it needs
>> to
>> be a synchronous write, so
>> write()
>> syscall is performed first then
>> it
>> performs fsync(). so an write
>> on
>> an
>> fd with O_SYNC becomes
>> write+fsync.
>> I am suspecting that when
>> multiple
>> threads do this write+fsync()
>> operation on the same file,
>> multiple writes are batched
>> together to be written do disk
>> so
>> the throughput on the disk is
>> increasing is my guess.
>>
>> Does it answer your doubts?
>>
>> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 9:35
>> PM,
>> Pat Haley <phaley at mit.edu
>> <mailto:phaley at mit.edu> <phaley at mit.edu>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Without the oflag=sync and
>> only
>> a single test of each, the
>> FUSE
>> is going faster than NFS:
>>
>> FUSE:
>> mseas-data2(dri_nascar)% dd
>> if=/dev/zero count=4096
>> bs=1048576 of=zeros.txt
>> conv=sync
>> 4096+0 records in
>> 4096+0 records out
>> 4294967296 bytes (4.3 GB)
>> copied, 7.46961 s, 575 MB/s
>>
>>
>> NFS
>> mseas-data2(HYCOM)% dd
>> if=/dev/zero count=4096
>> bs=1048576 of=zeros.txt
>> conv=sync
>> 4096+0 records in
>> 4096+0 records out
>> 4294967296 bytes (4.3 GB)
>> copied, 11.4264 s, 376 MB/s
>>
>>
>>
>> On 05/10/2017 11:53 AM,
>> Pranith
>> Kumar Karampuri wrote:
>>
>> Could you let me know the
>> speed without oflag=sync
>> on
>> both the mounts? No need
>> to
>> collect profiles.
>>
>> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at
>> 9:17
>> PM, Pat Haley
>> <phaley at mit.edu
>> <mailto:phaley at mit.edu> <phaley at mit.edu>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Here is what I see
>> now:
>>
>> [root at mseas-data2 ~]#
>> gluster volume info
>>
>> Volume Name:
>> data-volume
>> Type: Distribute
>> Volume ID:
>> c162161e-2a2d-4dac-b015-f31fd89ceb18
>> Status: Started
>> Number of Bricks: 2
>> Transport-type: tcp
>> Bricks:
>> Brick1:
>> mseas-data2:/mnt/brick1
>> Brick2:
>> mseas-data2:/mnt/brick2
>> Options Reconfigured:
>> diagnostics.count-fop-hits:
>> on
>> diagnostics.latency-measurement:
>> on
>> nfs.exports-auth-enable:
>> on
>> diagnostics.brick-sys-log-level:
>> WARNING
>> performance.readdir-ahead:
>> on
>> nfs.disable: on
>> nfs.export-volumes:
>> off
>>
>>
>>
>> On 05/10/2017 11:44
>> AM,
>> Pranith Kumar
>> Karampuri
>> wrote:
>>
>> Is this the volume
>> info
>> you have?
>>
>> >/[root at
>> >mseas-data2
>> <http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users> <http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users>
>> ~]# gluster volume
>> info
>> />//>/Volume Name:
>> data-volume />/Type:
>> Distribute />/Volume
>> ID:
>> c162161e-2a2d-4dac-b015-f31fd89ceb18
>> />/Status: Started
>> />/Number
>> of Bricks: 2
>> />/Transport-type:
>> tcp
>> />/Bricks: />/Brick1:
>> mseas-data2:/mnt/brick1
>> />/Brick2:
>> mseas-data2:/mnt/brick2
>> />/Options
>> Reconfigured:
>> />/performance.readdir-ahead:
>> on />/nfs.disable: on
>> />/nfs.export-volumes:
>> off
>> /
>> I copied this from
>> old
>> thread from 2016.
>> This
>> is
>> distribute volume.
>> Did
>> you change any of the
>> options in between?
>>
>> --
>>
>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>> Pat Haley
>> Email:phaley at mit.edu
>> <mailto:phaley at mit.edu> <phaley at mit.edu>
>> Center for Ocean
>> Engineering
>> Phone: (617) 253-6824
>> Dept. of Mechanical
>> Engineering
>> Fax: (617) 253-8125
>> MIT, Room
>> 5-213http://web.mit.edu/phaley/www/
>> 77 Massachusetts
>> Avenue
>> Cambridge, MA
>> 02139-4301
>>
>> --
>> Pranith
>>
>> --
>>
>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>> Pat Haley
>> Email:phaley at mit.edu
>> <mailto:phaley at mit.edu> <phaley at mit.edu>
>> Center for Ocean
>> Engineering
>> Phone: (617) 253-6824
>> Dept. of Mechanical
>> Engineering
>> Fax: (617) 253-8125
>> MIT, Room
>> 5-213http://web.mit.edu/phaley/www/
>> 77 Massachusetts Avenue
>> Cambridge, MA 02139-4301
>>
>> --
>> Pranith
>>
>> --
>>
>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>> Pat Haley
>> Email:phaley at mit.edu
>> <mailto:phaley at mit.edu> <phaley at mit.edu>
>> Center for Ocean Engineering
>> Phone:
>> (617) 253-6824
>> Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
>> Fax:
>> (617) 253-8125
>> MIT, Room
>> 5-213http://web.mit.edu/phaley/www/
>> 77 Massachusetts Avenue
>> Cambridge, MA 02139-4301
>>
>> --
>> Pranith
>>
>> --
>>
>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>> Pat Haley
>> Email:phaley at mit.edu
>> <mailto:phaley at mit.edu> <phaley at mit.edu>
>> Center for Ocean Engineering
>> Phone:
>> (617) 253-6824
>> Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
>> Fax:
>> (617) 253-8125
>> MIT, Room
>> 5-213http://web.mit.edu/phaley/www/
>> 77 Massachusetts Avenue
>> Cambridge, MA 02139-4301
>>
>> --
>> Pranith
>>
>> --
>>
>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>> Pat Haley
>> Email:phaley at mit.edu
>> <mailto:phaley at mit.edu> <phaley at mit.edu>
>> Center for Ocean Engineering Phone:
>> (617)
>> 253-6824
>> Dept. of Mechanical Engineering Fax:
>> (617)
>> 253-8125
>> MIT, Room
>> 5-213http://web.mit.edu/phaley/www/
>> 77 Massachusetts Avenue
>> Cambridge, MA 02139-4301
>>
>> --
>> Pranith
>>
>> --
>>
>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>> Pat Haley
>> Email:phaley at mit.edu
>> <mailto:phaley at mit.edu> <phaley at mit.edu>
>> Center for Ocean Engineering Phone:
>> (617)
>> 253-6824
>> Dept. of Mechanical Engineering Fax:
>> (617)
>> 253-8125
>> MIT, Room 5-213http://web.mit.edu/phaley/www/
>> 77 Massachusetts Avenue
>> Cambridge, MA 02139-4301
>>
>> --
>> Pranith
>>
>> --
>>
>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>> Pat Haley
>> Email:phaley at mit.edu
>> <mailto:phaley at mit.edu> <phaley at mit.edu>
>> Center for Ocean Engineering Phone: (617)
>> 253-6824
>> Dept. of Mechanical Engineering Fax: (617)
>> 253-8125
>> MIT, Room 5-213http://web.mit.edu/phaley/www/
>> 77 Massachusetts Avenue
>> Cambridge, MA 02139-4301
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Pranith
>>
>> --
>>
>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>> Pat Haley Email:phaley at mit.edu
>> <mailto:phaley at mit.edu> <phaley at mit.edu>
>> Center for Ocean Engineering Phone: (617) 253-6824
>> Dept. of Mechanical Engineering Fax: (617) 253-8125
>> MIT, Room 5-213http://web.mit.edu/phaley/www/
>> 77 Massachusetts Avenue
>> Cambridge, MA 02139-4301
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Pranith
>>
>> --
>>
>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>> Pat Haley Email:phaley at mit.edu
>> <mailto:phaley at mit.edu> <phaley at mit.edu>
>> Center for Ocean Engineering Phone: (617) 253-6824
>> Dept. of Mechanical Engineering Fax: (617) 253-8125
>> MIT, Room 5-213http://web.mit.edu/phaley/www/
>> 77 Massachusetts Avenue
>> Cambridge, MA 02139-4301
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Pranith
>>
>> --
>>
>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>> Pat Haley Email: phaley at mit.edu
>> Center for Ocean Engineering Phone: (617) 253-6824
>> Dept. of Mechanical Engineering Fax: (617) 253-8125
>> MIT, Room 5-213 http://web.mit.edu/phaley/www/
>> 77 Massachusetts Avenue
>> Cambridge, MA 02139-4301
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>> Pat Haley Email: phaley at mit.edu
>> Center for Ocean Engineering Phone: (617) 253-6824
>> Dept. of Mechanical Engineering Fax: (617) 253-8125
>> MIT, Room 5-213 http://web.mit.edu/phaley/www/
>> 77 Massachusetts Avenue
>> Cambridge, MA 02139-4301
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>> Pat Haley Email: phaley at mit.edu
>> Center for Ocean Engineering Phone: (617) 253-6824
>> Dept. of Mechanical Engineering Fax: (617) 253-8125
>> MIT, Room 5-213 http://web.mit.edu/phaley/www/
>> 77 Massachusetts Avenue
>> Cambridge, MA 02139-4301
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>> Pat Haley Email: phaley at mit.edu
>> Center for Ocean Engineering Phone: (617) 253-6824
>> Dept. of Mechanical Engineering Fax: (617) 253-8125
>> MIT, Room 5-213 http://web.mit.edu/phaley/www/
>> 77 Massachusetts Avenue
>> Cambridge, MA 02139-4301
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>> Pat Haley Email: phaley at mit.edu
>> Center for Ocean Engineering Phone: (617) 253-6824
>> Dept. of Mechanical Engineering Fax: (617) 253-8125
>> MIT, Room 5-213 http://web.mit.edu/phaley/www/
>> 77 Massachusetts Avenue
>> Cambridge, MA 02139-4301
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gluster-users mailing listGluster-users at gluster.orghttp://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>> Pat Haley Email: phaley at mit.edu
>> Center for Ocean Engineering Phone: (617) 253-6824
>> Dept. of Mechanical Engineering Fax: (617) 253-8125
>> MIT, Room 5-213 http://web.mit.edu/phaley/www/
>> 77 Massachusetts Avenue
>> Cambridge, MA 02139-4301
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Pranith
>
--
Pranith
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20170624/1294edac/attachment.html>
More information about the Gluster-users
mailing list