Hello,
Here is the volume info as requested by soumya:
#gluster volume info www
Volume Name: www
Type: Replicate
Volume ID: 5d64ee36-828a-41fa-adbf-75718b954aff
Status: Started
Snapshot Count: 0
Number of Bricks: 1 x 3 = 3
Transport-type: tcp
Bricks:
Brick1: 192.168.140.41:/gluster/www
Brick2: 192.168.140.42:/gluster/www
Brick3: 192.168.140.43:/gluster/www
Options Reconfigured:
cluster.read-hash-mode: 0
performance.quick-read: on
performance.write-behind-window-size: 4MB
server.allow-insecure: on
performance.read-ahead: disable
performance.readdir-ahead: on
performance.io-thread-count: 64
performance.io-cache: on
performance.client-io-threads: on
server.outstanding-rpc-limit: 128
server.event-threads: 3
client.event-threads: 3
performance.cache-size: 32MB
transport.address-family: inet
nfs.disable: on
nfs.addr-namelookup: off
nfs.export-volumes: on
nfs.rpc-auth-allow: 192.168.140.*
features.cache-invalidation: on
features.cache-invalidation-timeout: 600
performance.stat-prefetch: on
performance.cache-samba-metadata: on
performance.cache-invalidation: on
performance.md-cache-timeout: 600
network.inode-lru-limit: 100000
performance.parallel-readdir: on
performance.cache-refresh-timeout: 60
performance.rda-cache-limit: 50MB
cluster.nufa: on
network.ping-timeout: 5
cluster.lookup-optimize: on
cluster.quorum-type: auto
I started with none of them set and I added/changed while
testing. But it was always slow, by tuning some kernel parameters
it improved slightly (just a few percent, nothing reasonable)
I also tried ceph just to compare, I got this with default
settings and no tweaks:
./smallfile_cli.py --top /var/www/test --host-set
192.168.140.41 --threads 8 --files 5000 --file-size 64
--record-size 64
smallfile version 3.0
hosts in test : ['192.168.140.41']
top test directory(s) : ['/var/www/test']
operation : cleanup
files/thread : 5000
threads : 8
record size (KB, 0 = maximum) : 64
file size (KB) : 64
file size distribution : fixed
files per dir : 100
dirs per dir : 10
threads share directories? : N
filename prefix :
filename suffix :
hash file number into dir.? : N
fsync after modify? : N
pause between files (microsec) : 0
finish all requests? : Y
stonewall? : Y
measure response times? : N
verify read? : Y
verbose? : False
log to stderr? : False
ext.attr.size : 0
ext.attr.count : 0
permute host directories? : N
remote program directory : /root/smallfile-master
network thread sync. dir. :
/var/www/test/network_shared
starting all threads by creating starting gate file
/var/www/test/network_shared/starting_gate.tmp
host = 192.168.140.41,thr = 00,elapsed = 1.339621,files =
5000,records = 0,status = ok
host = 192.168.140.41,thr = 01,elapsed = 1.436776,files =
5000,records = 0,status = ok
host = 192.168.140.41,thr = 02,elapsed = 1.498681,files =
5000,records = 0,status = ok
host = 192.168.140.41,thr = 03,elapsed = 1.483886,files =
5000,records = 0,status = ok
host = 192.168.140.41,thr = 04,elapsed = 1.454833,files =
5000,records = 0,status = ok
host = 192.168.140.41,thr = 05,elapsed = 1.469340,files =
5000,records = 0,status = ok
host = 192.168.140.41,thr = 06,elapsed = 1.439060,files =
5000,records = 0,status = ok
host = 192.168.140.41,thr = 07,elapsed = 1.375074,files =
5000,records = 0,status = ok
total threads = 8
total files = 40000
100.00% of requested files processed, minimum is 70.00
1.498681 sec elapsed time
26690.134975 files/sec
Regards
Jo
-----Original message-----
*From:* Jo Goossens <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>
*Sent:* Tue 11-07-2017 12:15
*Subject:* Re: [Gluster-users] Gluster native mount is really
slow compared to nfs
*To:* Soumya Koduri <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>;
*CC:* Ambarish Soman <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>;
Hello,
Here is some speedtest with a new setup we just made with
gluster 3.10, there are no other differences, except
glusterfs versus nfs. The nfs is about 80 times faster:
root@app1:~/smallfile-master# mount -t glusterfs -o
use-readdirp=no,log-level=WARNING,log-file=/var/log/glusterxxx.log
192.168.140.41:/www /var/www
root@app1:~/smallfile-master# ./smallfile_cli.py --top
/var/www/test --host-set 192.168.140.41 --threads 8 --files
500 --file-size 64 --record-size 64
smallfile version 3.0
hosts in test : ['192.168.140.41']
top test directory(s) : ['/var/www/test']
operation : cleanup
files/thread : 500
threads : 8
record size (KB, 0 = maximum) : 64
file size (KB) : 64
file size distribution : fixed
files per dir : 100
dirs per dir : 10
threads share directories? : N
filename prefix :
filename suffix :
hash file number into dir.? : N
fsync after modify? : N
pause between files (microsec) : 0
finish all requests? : Y
stonewall? : Y
measure response times? : N
verify read? : Y
verbose? : False
log to stderr? : False
ext.attr.size : 0
ext.attr.count : 0
permute host directories? : N
remote program directory : /root/smallfile-master
network thread sync. dir. :
/var/www/test/network_shared
starting all threads by creating starting gate file
/var/www/test/network_shared/starting_gate.tmp
host = 192.168.140.41,thr = 00,elapsed = 68.845450,files =
500,records = 0,status = ok
host = 192.168.140.41,thr = 01,elapsed = 67.601088,files =
500,records = 0,status = ok
host = 192.168.140.41,thr = 02,elapsed = 58.677994,files =
500,records = 0,status = ok
host = 192.168.140.41,thr = 03,elapsed = 65.901922,files =
500,records = 0,status = ok
host = 192.168.140.41,thr = 04,elapsed = 66.971720,files =
500,records = 0,status = ok
host = 192.168.140.41,thr = 05,elapsed = 71.245102,files =
500,records = 0,status = ok
host = 192.168.140.41,thr = 06,elapsed = 67.574845,files =
500,records = 0,status = ok
host = 192.168.140.41,thr = 07,elapsed = 54.263242,files =
500,records = 0,status = ok
total threads = 8
total files = 4000
100.00% of requested files processed, minimum is 70.00
71.245102 sec elapsed time
56.144211 files/sec
umount /var/www
root@app1:~/smallfile-master# mount -t nfs -o tcp
192.168.140.41:/www /var/www
root@app1:~/smallfile-master# ./smallfile_cli.py --top
/var/www/test --host-set 192.168.140.41 --threads 8 --files
500 --file-size 64 --record-size 64
smallfile version 3.0
hosts in test : ['192.168.140.41']
top test directory(s) : ['/var/www/test']
operation : cleanup
files/thread : 500
threads : 8
record size (KB, 0 = maximum) : 64
file size (KB) : 64
file size distribution : fixed
files per dir : 100
dirs per dir : 10
threads share directories? : N
filename prefix :
filename suffix :
hash file number into dir.? : N
fsync after modify? : N
pause between files (microsec) : 0
finish all requests? : Y
stonewall? : Y
measure response times? : N
verify read? : Y
verbose? : False
log to stderr? : False
ext.attr.size : 0
ext.attr.count : 0
permute host directories? : N
remote program directory : /root/smallfile-master
network thread sync. dir. :
/var/www/test/network_shared
starting all threads by creating starting gate file
/var/www/test/network_shared/starting_gate.tmp
host = 192.168.140.41,thr = 00,elapsed = 0.962424,files =
500,records = 0,status = ok
host = 192.168.140.41,thr = 01,elapsed = 0.942673,files =
500,records = 0,status = ok
host = 192.168.140.41,thr = 02,elapsed = 0.940622,files =
500,records = 0,status = ok
host = 192.168.140.41,thr = 03,elapsed = 0.915218,files =
500,records = 0,status = ok
host = 192.168.140.41,thr = 04,elapsed = 0.934349,files =
500,records = 0,status = ok
host = 192.168.140.41,thr = 05,elapsed = 0.922466,files =
500,records = 0,status = ok
host = 192.168.140.41,thr = 06,elapsed = 0.954381,files =
500,records = 0,status = ok
host = 192.168.140.41,thr = 07,elapsed = 0.946127,files =
500,records = 0,status = ok
total threads = 8
total files = 4000
100.00% of requested files processed, minimum is 70.00
0.962424 sec elapsed time
4156.173189 files/sec
-----Original message-----
*From:* Jo Goossens <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>
*Sent:* Tue 11-07-2017 11:26
*Subject:* Re: [Gluster-users] Gluster native mount is
really slow compared to nfs
*To:* [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>; Soumya Koduri
<[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]>;
*CC:* Ambarish Soman <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>;
Hi all,
One more thing, we have 3 apps servers with the gluster
on it, replicated on 3 different gluster nodes. (So the
gluster nodes are app servers at the same time). We could
actually almost work locally if we wouldn't need to have
the same files on the 3 nodes and redundancy :)
Initial cluster was created like this:
gluster volume create www replica 3 transport tcp
192.168.140.41:/gluster/www 192.168.140.42:/gluster/www
192.168.140.43:/gluster/www force
gluster volume set www network.ping-timeout 5
gluster volume set www performance.cache-size 1024MB
gluster volume set www nfs.disable on # No need for NFS
currently
gluster volume start www
To my understanding it still wouldn't explain why nfs has
such great performance compared to native ...
Regards
Jo
-----Original message-----
*From:* Soumya Koduri <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>
*Sent:* Tue 11-07-2017 11:16
*Subject:* Re: [Gluster-users] Gluster native mount
is really slow compared to nfs
*To:* Jo Goossens <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>;
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>;
*CC:* Ambarish Soman <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>; Karan Sandha
<[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]>;
+ Ambarish
On 07/11/2017 02:31 PM, Jo Goossens wrote:
> Hello,
>
>
>
>
>
> We tried tons of settings to get a php app running
on a native gluster
> mount:
>
>
>
> e.g.: 192.168.140.41:/www /var/www glusterfs
>
defaults,_netdev,backup-volfile-servers=192.168.140.42:192.168.140.43,direct-io-mode=disable
> 0 0
>
>
>
> I tried some mount variants in order to speed up
things without luck.
>
>
>
>
>
> After that I tried nfs (native gluster nfs 3 and
ganesha nfs 4), it was
> a crazy performance difference.
>
>
>
> e.g.: 192.168.140.41:/www /var/www nfs4
defaults,_netdev 0 0
>
>
>
> I tried a test like this to confirm the slowness:
>
>
>
> ./smallfile_cli.py --top /var/www/test --host-set
192.168.140.41
> --threads 8 --files 5000 --file-size 64
--record-size 64
>
> This test finished in around 1.5 seconds with NFS
and in more than 250
> seconds without nfs (can't remember exact numbers,
but I reproduced it
> several times for both).
>
> With the native gluster mount the php app had
loading times of over 10
> seconds, with the nfs mount the php app loaded
around 1 second maximum
> and even less. (reproduced several times)
>
>
>
> I tried all kind of performance settings and
variants of this but not
> helped , the difference stayed huge, here are some
of the settings
> played with in random order:
>
Request Ambarish & Karan (cc'ed who have been working
on evaluating
performance of various access protocols gluster
supports) to look at the
below settings and provide inputs.
Thanks,
Soumya
>
>
> gluster volume set www features.cache-invalidation on
> gluster volume set www
features.cache-invalidation-timeout 600
> gluster volume set www performance.stat-prefetch on
> gluster volume set www
performance.cache-samba-metadata on
> gluster volume set www
performance.cache-invalidation on
> gluster volume set www performance.md-cache-timeout 600
> gluster volume set www network.inode-lru-limit 250000
>
> gluster volume set www
performance.cache-refresh-timeout 60
> gluster volume set www performance.read-ahead disable
> gluster volume set www performance.readdir-ahead on
> gluster volume set www performance.parallel-readdir on
> gluster volume set www
performance.write-behind-window-size 4MB
> gluster volume set www performance.io-thread-count 64
>
> gluster volume set www performance.client-io-threads on
>
> gluster volume set www performance.cache-size 1GB
> gluster volume set www performance.quick-read on
> gluster volume set www performance.flush-behind on
> gluster volume set www performance.write-behind on
> gluster volume set www nfs.disable on
>
> gluster volume set www client.event-threads 3
> gluster volume set www server.event-threads 3
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The NFS ha adds a lot of complexity which we
wouldn't need at all in our
> setup, could you please explain what is going on
here? Is NFS the only
> solution to get acceptable performance? Did I miss
one crucial settting
> perhaps?
>
>
>
> We're really desperate, thanks a lot for your help!
>
>
>
>
>
> PS: We tried with gluster 3.11 and 3.8 on Debian,
both had terrible
> performance when not used with nfs.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Kind regards
>
> Jo Goossens
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-users mailing list
> [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
