Hi Ernie,
For small-files, there are few tunables you would go for a good performance.
first stop the volume and then set the below parameters:-
**
*gluster volume set *<volname>* cluster.lookup-optimize on*
*
gluster volume set **<volname>** server.event-threads 4
gluster volume set **<volname>** client.event-threads 4
*
Start the volume and do a rebalance on the volume using :- gluster
volume rebalance <volname> start ; check the status using the gluster
volume rebalance <volname> status . you will be seeing a bump in
performance of small files workload.
Thanks & Regards
Karan Sandha
On 02/25/2017 02:46 PM, Vahric Muhtaryan wrote:
Hello Ernie ,
Actually why not really set it Raid0 also for mail server raid10
should be fine , you can do it both .
Actually I m not real gluster user but just only tried for vm
instances . I find from blogs fro small io you should also care and
tune about LOOKUP issues
One more actually I don’t know how you are handling HA but with
glusterfs but I believe that if you are not using NFS Ganesha you have
single point of failure everytime , isn't it ?
Regards
VM
From: <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of Ernie Dunbar
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Friday, 24 February 2017 at 22:36
To: Gluster-users <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: **SPAM** [Gluster-users] Gluster performance is paramount!
Hi everyone!
We have a gluster array of three servers supporting a large mail
server with about 10,000 e-mail accounts with the Maildir file format.
This means lots of random small file reads and writes. Gluster's
performance hasn't been great since we switched to it from a local
disk on a single server, but we're aiming for high availability here,
since simply restoring that mail from backups (or even backing it up
in the first place) takes a day or two. Clearly, some kind of network
drive is what we need, and Gluster does the job better than every
other solution we've looked at so far.
The problem comes from the fact that when I set out on this project,
I'd never done any kind of performance tuning before. We didn't need
it. All three of our Gluster servers are set up in a RAID5 array with
a hot spare. I'm starting to think that the performance woes we have
all stem from this fact, and speaking to one of my colleagues, it was
suggested that Gluster can handle the data integrity just fine on its
own, so why don't we just switch to the fastest possible type, RAID0
and completely toss out any data integrity on each individual node in
the cluster?
While this sounds good in theory, I'd like to know how well this works
in practice before subjecting our 10,000 e-mail clients to this
experiment. The other possibility is to switch our Gluster nodes to
RAID1 or 10, which might be faster than RAID5 while still keeping some
semblance of data integrity.
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing
list [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
