For Samba usecase, please make sure you have nl-cache (ie, 'negative-lookup cache') enabled. We have seen some improvements from this value.
-Amar On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 8:23 PM David Spisla <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Gluster Community, > > it is a known fact that Samba+Gluster has a bad smallfile performance. We > now have some test measurements created by this setup: 2-Node-Cluster on > real hardware with Replica-2 Volume (just one subvolume), Gluster v.4.1.6, > Samba v4.7. Samba writes to Gluster via FUSE. Files created by fio. We used > a Windows System as Client which is in the same network like the servers. > > The measurements are as follows. In each test case 400 files were written: > > 64KiB_x_400 files 1MiB_x_400 files > 10MiB_x_400 files > 1 Thread 0,77 MiB/s 8,05 > MiB/s 72,67 MiB/s > 4 Threads 0,86 MiB/s 8,92 MiB/s > 90,38 MiB/s > 8 Threads 0,87 MiB/s 8,92 > MiB/s 94,75 MiB/s > > Does anyone have measurements that are in a similar range or are > significantly different? > We do not know which values can still be considered "normal" and which are > not. > We also know that there are options to improve performance. But first of all > we are interested > in whether there are reference values. > Regards > David Spisla > > _______________________________________________ > Gluster-users mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users -- Amar Tumballi (amarts)
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
