On 7 Mar 2011, at 23:04, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote: > I need to be able to read 500 megabytes/second, sustained, from a > single file using a single thread. I have achieved such speeds and > higher, reading 200+ gigabytes sequentially, using a fast RAID and XFS > (i.e., local storage). I would like to replace that design with > something more networked and scalable. But my individual clients > still require 500+ megabyte/second reads. > > If I tie together a half dozen fast GlusterFS servers with 10GigE, > will I be able to serve another half dozen 10GigE clients at 500MB/sec > each? (Again, assuming single-file, single-thread on each client. > Also assume each server can read/write its local store at ~1000 MB/sec > sustained.)
10GigE will give you net throughput of around 1Gbyte/sec, so two clients going at 500M/sec on the same partition/interface (and assuming your switch will run at wire speed) will saturate it. Maybe you should have a separate 10G interface on each server for each client? You might run into trouble with bus bandwidth on the servers though. >From what I understand of gluster, you might get this kind of bandwidth if the >target files happen to be on different servers, but I'm not sure how you'd >make sure they were on different servers in order to increase capacity, unless >you effectively raid-1 your data across all servers. Even then, you'd need >some way of round-robining that's consistent across all clients. I may be wrong here, mainly thinking out loud! Marcus _______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@gluster.org http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
