On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 10:38 PM, Pat Haley wrote:
>
> Hi Raghavendra,
>
> We ran the tests (write tests) and I copied the log files for both the
> server and the client to http://mseas.mit.edu/download/
> phaley/GlusterUsers/2018/Jun29/ . Is there any additional trace
> information you need?
Hi everyone. I have a question about performance, hoping that perhaps
someone has already tested these scenarios so that I don't have to.
In order to maximize a Gluster array's performance, which is faster:
Gluster servers with 6 SAS disks each set up in a RAID0 configuration,
letting Gluster
Hi Raghavendra,
We ran the tests (write tests) and I copied the log files for both the
server and the client to
http://mseas.mit.edu/download/phaley/GlusterUsers/2018/Jun29/ . Is
there any additional trace information you need? (If so, where should I
look for it?)
Also the volume
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 8:24 PM, Pat Haley wrote:
>
> Hi Raghavendra,
>
> Our technician was able to try the manual setting today. He found that
> our upper limit for performance.md-cache-timeout was 60 not 600, so he
> used that value, along with the network.inode-lru-limit=5.
>
> The
it's such a shame devel have not improved these bits yet. Would be nice
to have hooks managed by cli.
You can disable it with removing a hook script exists in
/var/lib/glusterd/hooks/1/start/post/S30samba-start.sh
- 원본 메일 -
보낸사람:lejeczek
Hello,
I read from Red Hat website that Gluster has this limit:
- Tiering is neither compatible with arbitrated replicated volumes,
nor with Samba
I wonder if this limit still applies to version 3.14 and 4.0 .
Indeed I was planning to use tiering with SSD drives, but keeping the 2x3
Hi Raghavendra,
Our technician was able to try the manual setting today. He found that
our upper limit for performance.md-cache-timeout was 60 not 600, so he
used that value, along with the network.inode-lru-limit=5.
The result was another small (~1%) increase in speed. Does this
