Re: [Gluster-users] Expected performance for WORM scenario

Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] Expected performance for WORM scenario We can't stick to single server because the law. Redundancy is a legal requirement for our business. I'm sort of giving up on gluster though. It would seem a pretty stupid content addressable storage would suit our needs better.

Re: [Gluster-users] Expected performance for WORM scenario

arampuri [mailto:pkara...@redhat.com] >> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 13, 2018 9:10 AM >> >> *To:* Ondrej Valousek <ondrej.valou...@s3group.com> >> *Cc:* Andreas Ericsson <andreas.erics...@findity.com>; >> Gluster-users@gluster.org >> *Subject:*

Re: [Gluster-users] Expected performance for WORM scenario

. From: Andreas Ericsson [mailto:andreas.erics...@findity.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2018 10:43 AM To: Pranith Kumar Karampuri <pkara...@redhat.com> Cc: Ondrej Valousek <ondrej.valou...@s3group.com>; Gluster-users@gluster.org Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] Expected performance for W

Re: [Gluster-users] Expected performance for WORM scenario

ousek <ondrej.valou...@s3group.com> > *Cc:* Andreas Ericsson <andreas.erics...@findity.com>; > Gluster-users@gluster.org > *Subject:* Re: [Gluster-users] Expected performance for WORM scenario > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 1:37 PM, Ondrej Valousek &l

Re: [Gluster-users] Expected performance for WORM scenario

gt; If the last line in there is LOOKUP, mostly we need to enable nl-cache > feature and see how it performs. > > >> Ondrej >> >> >> >> *From:* gluster-users-boun...@gluster.org [mailto:gluster-users-bounces@ >> gluster.org] *On Behalf Of *Andreas E

Re: [Gluster-users] Expected performance for WORM scenario

I no longer have the volume lying around. The most interesting one was a 2GB volume created on ramdisk for a single node. If I can't get that to go faster than 3MB/sec for writes, I figured I wouldn't bother further. I was using gluster fuse fs 3.10.7. Everything was running on ubuntu 16.04

Re: [Gluster-users] Expected performance for WORM scenario

lou...@s3group.com> Cc: Andreas Ericsson <andreas.erics...@findity.com>; Gluster-users@gluster.org Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] Expected performance for WORM scenario On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 2:42 PM, Ondrej Valousek <ondrej.valou...@s3group.com<mailto:ondrej.valou...@s3group.com>>

Re: [Gluster-users] Expected performance for WORM scenario

ndrej Valousek <ondrej.valou...@s3group.com> > *Cc:* Andreas Ericsson <andreas.erics...@findity.com>; > Gluster-users@gluster.org > *Subject:* Re: [Gluster-users] Expected performance for WORM scenario > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 1:37 P

Re: [Gluster-users] Expected performance for WORM scenario

rs@gluster.org<mailto:Gluster-users@gluster.org> Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] Expected performance for WORM scenario On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 6:23 PM, Ondrej Valousek <ondrej.valou...@s3group.com<mailto:ondrej.valou...@s3group.com>> wrote: Hi, Gluster will never perform well for smal

Re: [Gluster-users] Expected performance for WORM scenario

eas Ericsson <andreas.erics...@findity.com>; Gluster-users@gluster.org Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] Expected performance for WORM scenario On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 6:23 PM, Ondrej Valousek <ondrej.valou...@s3group.com<mailto:ondrej.valou...@s3group.com>> wrote: Hi, Gluster wil

Re: [Gluster-users] Expected performance for WORM scenario

he > feature and see how it performs. > Please attach this as extra information along with what Nitya asked in the previous mail. > > >> Ondrej >> >> >> >> *From:* gluster-users-boun...@gluster.org [mailto:gluster-users-bounces@ >> gluster.org] *On Behalf O

Re: [Gluster-users] Expected performance for WORM scenario

Hi, Can you send us the following details: 1. gluster volume info 2. What client you are using to run this? Thanks, Nithya On 12 March 2018 at 18:16, Andreas Ericsson wrote: > Heya fellas. > > I've been struggling quite a lot to get glusterfs to perform even >

Re: [Gluster-users] Expected performance for WORM scenario

Subject: [Gluster-users] Expected performance for WORM scenario Heya fellas. I've been struggling quite a lot to get glusterfs to perform even halfdecently with a write-intensive workload. Testnumbers are from gluster 3.10.7. We store a bunch of small files in a doubly-tiered sha1 hash fanout

[Gluster-users] Expected performance for WORM scenario

Heya fellas. I've been struggling quite a lot to get glusterfs to perform even halfdecently with a write-intensive workload. Testnumbers are from gluster 3.10.7. We store a bunch of small files in a doubly-tiered sha1 hash fanout directory structure. The directories themselves aren't overly