Regards, Ravi On 04/14/2017 03:48 AM, Pat Haley wrote:
Hi Ravi (and list),We are planning on testing the NFS route to see what kind of speed-up we get. A little research led us to the following:https://gluster.readthedocs.io/en/latest/Administrator%20Guide/NFS-Ganesha%20GlusterFS%20Integration/Is this correct path to take to mount 2 xfs volumes as a single gluster file system volume? If not, what would be a better path?Pat On 04/11/2017 12:21 AM, Ravishankar N wrote:On 04/11/2017 12:42 AM, Pat Haley wrote:Hi Ravi,Thanks for the reply. And yes, we are using the gluster native (fuse) mount. Since this is not my area of expertise I have a few questions (mostly clarifications)Is a factor of 20 slow-down typical when compare a fuse-mounted filesytem versus an NFS-mounted filesystem or should we also be looking for additional issues? (Note the first dd test described below was run on the server that hosts the file-systems so no network communication was involved).Though both the gluster bricks and the mounts are on the same physical machine in your setup, the I/O still passes through different layers of kernel/user-space fuse stack although I don't know if 20x slow down on gluster vs NFS share is normal. Why don't you try doing a gluster NFS mount on the machine and try the dd test and compare it with the gluster fuse mount results?You also mention tweaking " write-behind xlator settings". Would you expect better speed improvements from switching the mounting from fuse to gnfs or from tweaking the settings? Also are these mutually exclusive or would the be additional benefits from both switching to gfns and tweaking?You should test these out and find the answers yourself. :-)Yes, for gnfs mounts, all I/O from various mounts go to the gnfs server process (on the machine whose IP was used at the time of mounting) which then sends the I/O to the brick processes. For fuse, the gluster fuse mount itself talks directly to the bricks.My next question is to make sure I'm clear on the comment " if the gluster node containing the gnfs server goes down, all mounts done using that node will fail". If you have 2 servers, each 1 brick in the over-all gluster FS, and one server fails, then for gnfs nothing on either server is visible to other nodes while under fuse only the files on the dead server are not visible. Is this what you meant?I don't think it would. You can even achieve load balancing via CTDB to use different gnfs servers for different clients. But I don't know if this is needed/ helpful in your current setup where everything (bricks and clients) seem to be on just one server.Finally, you mention "even for gnfs mounts, you can achieve fail-over by using CTDB". Do you know if CTDB would have any performance impact (i.e. in a worst cast scenario could adding CTDB to gnfs erase the speed benefits of going to gnfs in the first place)?-RaviThanks Pat On 04/08/2017 12:58 AM, Ravishankar N wrote:Hi Pat,I'm assuming you are using gluster native (fuse mount). If it helps, you could try mounting it via gluster NFS (gnfs) and then see if there is an improvement in speed. Fuse mounts are slower than gnfs mounts but you get the benefit of avoiding a single point of failure. Unlike fuse mounts, if the gluster node containing the gnfs server goes down, all mounts done using that node will fail). For fuse mounts, you could try tweaking the write-behind xlator settings to see if it helps. See the performance.write-behind and performance.write-behind-window-size options in `gluster volume set help`. Of course, even for gnfs mounts, you can achieve fail-over by using CTDB.Thanks, Ravi On 04/08/2017 12:07 AM, Pat Haley wrote:Hi,We noticed a dramatic slowness when writing to a gluster disk when compared to writing to an NFS disk. Specifically when using dd (data duplicator) to write a 4.3 GB file of zeros:* on NFS disk (/home): 9.5 Gb/s * on gluster disk (/gdata): 508 Mb/sThe gluser disk is 2 bricks joined together, no replication or anything else. The hardware is (literally) the same:* one server with 70 hard disks and a hardware RAID card. * 4 disks in a RAID-6 group (the NFS disk) * 32 disks in a RAID-6 group (the max allowed by the card, /mnt/brick1) * 32 disks in another RAID-6 group (/mnt/brick2) * 2 hot spareSome additional information and more tests results (after changing the log level):glusterfs 3.7.11 built on Apr 27 2016 14:09:22 CentOS release 6.8 (Final)RAID bus controller: LSI Logic / Symbios Logic MegaRAID SAS-3 3108 [Invader] (rev 02)*Create the file to /gdata (gluster)*[root@mseas-data2 gdata]# dd if=/dev/zero of=/gdata/zero1 bs=1M count=10001000+0 records in 1000+0 records out 1048576000 bytes (1.0 GB) copied, 1.91876 s, *546 MB/s* *Create the file to /home (ext4)*[root@mseas-data2 gdata]# dd if=/dev/zero of=/home/zero1 bs=1M count=10001000+0 records in 1000+0 records out1048576000 bytes (1.0 GB) copied, 0.686021 s, *1.5 GB/s - *3 times as fast*Copy from /gdata to /gdata (gluster to gluster) *[root@mseas-data2 gdata]# dd if=/gdata/zero1 of=/gdata/zero2 2048000+0 records in 2048000+0 records out1048576000 bytes (1.0 GB) copied, 101.052 s, *10.4 MB/s* - realllyyy slooowww*Copy from /gdata to /gdata* *2nd time *(gluster to gluster)** [root@mseas-data2 gdata]# dd if=/gdata/zero1 of=/gdata/zero2 2048000+0 records in 2048000+0 records out1048576000 bytes (1.0 GB) copied, 92.4904 s, *11.3 MB/s* - realllyyy slooowww again*Copy from /home to /home (ext4 to ext4)* [root@mseas-data2 gdata]# dd if=/home/zero1 of=/home/zero2 2048000+0 records in 2048000+0 records out1048576000 bytes (1.0 GB) copied, 3.53263 s, *297 MB/s *30 times as fast*Copy from /home to /home (ext4 to ext4)* [root@mseas-data2 gdata]# dd if=/home/zero1 of=/home/zero3 2048000+0 records in 2048000+0 records out1048576000 bytes (1.0 GB) copied, 4.1737 s, *251 MB/s* - 30 times as fastAs a test, can we copy data directly to the xfs mountpoint (/mnt/brick1) and bypass gluster?Any help you could give us would be appreciated. Thanks -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Pat Haley Email:[email protected] Center for Ocean Engineering Phone: (617) 253-6824 Dept. of Mechanical Engineering Fax: (617) 253-8125 MIT, Room 5-213http://web.mit.edu/phaley/www/ 77 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02139-4301 _______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users-- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Pat Haley Email:[email protected] Center for Ocean Engineering Phone: (617) 253-6824 Dept. of Mechanical Engineering Fax: (617) 253-8125 MIT, Room 5-213http://web.mit.edu/phaley/www/ 77 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02139-4301-- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Pat Haley Email:[email protected] Center for Ocean Engineering Phone: (617) 253-6824 Dept. of Mechanical Engineering Fax: (617) 253-8125 MIT, Room 5-213http://web.mit.edu/phaley/www/ 77 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02139-4301
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
