I think TCP_NODELAY is critical to performance. Actuall after spending
a large number of unfruitful hours on glusterfs, I wrote my own simple
shared storage with BerkeleyDB backend, and I found that enabling
TCP_NODELAY on my system gives me nearly 10x readback throughput.
Thanks for pointing
David Saez Padros wrote:
Hi
The
second is 'option transport.socket.nodelay on' in each of your
protocol/client _and_ protocol/server volumes.
where is this option documented ?
Thanks for pointing this out.
We wanted to expose this as a regular option in the upcoming 2.1 release
and had in
Mark Mielke wrote:
I'm a little surprised TCP_NODELAY isn't set by default? I set it on
all servers I write as a matter of principle.
Serious servers intended to perform well should be able to easily beat
the Nagle algorithm. writev(), sendmsg(), or even write(buffer) where
the buffer is buil
On 09/29/2009 03:39 AM, David Saez Padros wrote:
The
second is 'option transport.socket.nodelay on' in each of your
protocol/client _and_ protocol/server volumes.
where is this option documented ?
I'm a little surprised TCP_NODELAY isn't set by default? I set it on all
servers I write as a m
Hi
The
second is 'option transport.socket.nodelay on' in each of your
protocol/client _and_ protocol/server volumes.
where is this option documented ?
--
Thanx & best regards ...
David Saez Padroshttp://www.o
> http://www.gluster.com/community/documentation/index.php/Translators/cluster/distribute
>
> It seems to suggest that 'lookup-unhashed' says that the default is 'on'.
>
> Perhaps try turning it 'off'?
Wei,
There are two things we would like you to try. First is what Mark
has just pointed, the
On 09/28/2009 10:51 AM, Wei Dong wrote:
Your reply makes all sense to me. I remember that auto-heal happens
at file reading; doest that mean opening a file for read is also a
global operation? Do you mean that there's no other way of copying 30
million files to our 66-node glusterfs cluster f
Your reply makes all sense to me. I remember that auto-heal happens at
file reading; doest that mean opening a file for read is also a global
operation? Do you mean that there's no other way of copying 30 million
files to our 66-node glusterfs cluster for parallel processing other
than waitin
On 09/28/2009 10:35 AM, Wei Dong wrote:
Hi All,
I noticed a very weird phenomenon when I'm copying data (200KB image
files) to our glusterfs storage. When I run only run client, it
copies roughly 20 files per second and as soon as I start a second
client on another machine, the copy rate of
Hi All,
I noticed a very weird phenomenon when I'm copying data (200KB image
files) to our glusterfs storage. When I run only run client, it copies
roughly 20 files per second and as soon as I start a second client on
another machine, the copy rate of the first client immediately degrade
to
10 matches
Mail list logo