[Gluster-users] GlusterFS performance for big files...
gilberto.nunes32 at gmail.com
Tue Aug 18 13:47:01 UTC 2020
>> What's your workload?
I have 6 KVM VMs which have Windows and Linux installed on it.
iostat (I am using sdc as the main storage)
cavg-cpu: %user %nice %system %iowait %steal %idle
9.15 0.00 1.25 1.38 0.00 88.22
Device r/s w/s rkB/s wkB/s rrqm/s wrqm/s %rrqm
%wrqm r_await w_await aqu-sz rareq-sz wareq-sz svctm %util
sdc 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.50 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.50
>> sequential? random?
>> many files?
6 files 500G 200G 200G 250G 200G 100G size each.
With more bricks and nodes, you should probably use sharding.
For now I have only two bricks/nodes.... Plan for more is now out of the
What are your expectations, btw?
I ran many environments with Proxmox Virtual Environment, which use QEMU
(not virt) and LXC...But I use majority KVM (QEMU) virtual machines.
My goal is to use glusterfs since I think it's more resource demanding such
as memory and cpu and nic, when compared to ZFS or CEPH.
Gilberto Nunes Ferreira
(47) 99676-7530 - Whatsapp / Telegram
Em ter., 18 de ago. de 2020 às 10:29, sankarshan <
sankarshan.mukhopadhyay at gmail.com> escreveu:
> On Tue, 18 Aug 2020 at 18:50, Yaniv Kaul <ykaul at redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 3:57 PM Gilberto Nunes <
> gilberto.nunes32 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hi friends...
> >> I have a 2-nodes GlusterFS, with has the follow configuration:
> >> gluster vol info
> I'd be interested in the chosen configuration for this deployment -
> the 2 node set up. Was there a specific requirement which led to this?
> >> Volume Name: VMS
> >> Type: Replicate
> >> Volume ID: a4ec9cfb-1bba-405c-b249-8bd5467e0b91
> >> Status: Started
> >> Snapshot Count: 0
> >> Number of Bricks: 1 x 2 = 2
> >> Transport-type: tcp
> >> Bricks:
> >> Brick1: server02:/DATA/vms
> >> Brick2: server01:/DATA/vms
> >> Options Reconfigured:
> >> performance.read-ahead: off
> >> performance.io-cache: on
> >> performance.cache-refresh-timeout: 1
> >> performance.cache-size: 1073741824
> >> performance.io-thread-count: 64
> >> performance.write-behind-window-size: 64MB
> >> cluster.granular-entry-heal: enable
> >> cluster.self-heal-daemon: enable
> >> performance.client-io-threads: on
> >> cluster.data-self-heal-algorithm: full
> >> cluster.favorite-child-policy: mtime
> >> network.ping-timeout: 2
> >> cluster.quorum-count: 1
> >> cluster.quorum-reads: false
> >> cluster.heal-timeout: 20
> >> storage.fips-mode-rchecksum: on
> >> transport.address-family: inet
> >> nfs.disable: on
> >> HDDs are SSD and SAS
> >> Network connections between the servers are dedicated 1GB (no switch!).
> > You can't get good performance on 1Gb.
> >> Files are 500G 200G 200G 250G 200G 100G size each.
> >> Performance so far so good is ok...
> > What's your workload? Read? Write? sequential? random? many files?
> > With more bricks and nodes, you should probably use sharding.
> > What are your expectations, btw?
> > Y.
> >> Any other advice which could point me, let me know!
> >> Thanks
> >> ---
> >> Gilberto Nunes Ferreira
> >> ________
> >> Community Meeting Calendar:
> >> Schedule -
> >> Every 2nd and 4th Tuesday at 14:30 IST / 09:00 UTC
> >> Bridge: https://bluejeans.com/441850968
> >> Gluster-users mailing list
> >> Gluster-users at gluster.org
> >> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
> > ________
> > Community Meeting Calendar:
> > Schedule -
> > Every 2nd and 4th Tuesday at 14:30 IST / 09:00 UTC
> > Bridge: https://bluejeans.com/441850968
> > Gluster-users mailing list
> > Gluster-users at gluster.org
> > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
> sankarshan mukhopadhyay
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Gluster-users