> Sure, and all that applies equally to both NFS and gluster, yet in Max's > example NFS was ~50x faster than gluster for an identical small-file > workload. So what's gluster doing over and above what NFS is doing that's > taking so long, given that network and disk factors are equal? I'd buy a > factor of 2 for replication, but not 50. >
Sorry If I didnt make it clear but both NFS in my tests is not well known classic NFS but glusterfs in NFS mode. _______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list [email protected] http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
