I believe some of the staff tested gfapi back in the 3.4 days and found
that at least that version didn't make a perceptible difference though
it tested about 10% faster. We stayed with Fuse because at that time
gfapi was still newish and we had used fuse for quite awhile and
understood it.
Evidently gfapi has improved since then (assuming the corruption issue
is resolved).
On 5/16/16 8:08 PM, Lindsay Mathieson wrote:
On 17 May 2016 at 10:02, WK <wkm...@bneit.com> wrote:
That being said, when we lose a brick, we've traditionally just live
migrated those VMs off onto other clusters because we didn't want to take
the heal hit which at best slowed down our VMs at on the pickier ones cause
them to RO out.
We have not yet upgraded to 3.7.x yet (still on 3.4 cuz it aint broke) and
are hoping that sharding solves that problem. But it seems everytime it
looks like things are 'safe' for 3.7.x, something comes up. Fortunately, we
like the fuse mount so maybe we are still ok.
Unfortunately(?) I get much better performance out of the gfapi -
seeing around 30-40% better reads and IOPs over the fuse client in
VM's.
_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
