[Gluster-users] Samba+Gluster: Performance measurements for small files

Amar Tumballi Suryanarayan atumball at redhat.com
Tue Jan 22 06:12:55 UTC 2019

For Samba usecase, please make sure you have nl-cache (ie, 'negative-lookup
cache') enabled. We have seen some improvements from this value.


On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 8:23 PM David Spisla <spisla80 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Gluster Community,
> it is a known fact that Samba+Gluster has a bad smallfile performance. We
> now have some test measurements created by this setup: 2-Node-Cluster on
> real hardware with Replica-2 Volume (just one subvolume), Gluster v.4.1.6,
> Samba v4.7. Samba writes to Gluster via FUSE. Files created by fio. We used
> a Windows System as Client which is in the same network like the servers.
> The measurements are as follows. In each test case 400 files were written:
>                        64KiB_x_400 files            1MiB_x_400 files
>      10MiB_x_400 files
> 1 Thread          0,77 MiB/s                       8,05
> MiB/s                    72,67 MiB/s
> 4 Threads        0,86 MiB/s                       8,92 MiB/s
>       90,38 MiB/s
> 8 Threads        0,87 MiB/s                       8,92
> MiB/s                     94,75 MiB/s
> Does anyone have measurements that are in a similar range or are significantly different?
> We do not know which values can still be considered "normal" and which are not.
> We also know that there are options to improve performance. But first of all we are interested
> in whether there are reference values.
> Regards
> David Spisla
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users at gluster.org
> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

Amar Tumballi (amarts)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20190122/75abefbc/attachment.html>

More information about the Gluster-users mailing list