[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

RE: [Linux-cluster] GFS performance



Hi Wendy,

IOZONE v3.283 was used to generate the results I posted.

An example invocation line [for the IOPS result]:


./iozone -O -l 1 -u 8 -T -b /root/iozone_IOPS_1_TO_8_THREAD_1_DISK_ISCSI_DIRECT.xls -F /mnt/iscsi_direct1/iozone/iozone1.tmp ...


It's for 1 to 8 threads, and I provided 8 file names through I'm only showing one in the line above.  The file destinations were on the same disk for a single disk test, and on alternating disks for a 2-disk test.  I believe IOZONE uses a simple random string, repeated in certain default record sizes, when performing its various operations.

- K



-----Original Message-----
From: linux-cluster-bounces redhat com [mailto:linux-cluster-bounces redhat com] On Behalf Of Wendy Cheng
Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2008 12:01 PM
To: linux clustering
Subject: Re: [Linux-cluster] GFS performance

Kamal Jain wrote:

> A challenge we're dealing with is a massive number of small files, so
> there is a lot of file-level overhead, and as you saw in the
> charts...the random reads and writes were not friends of GFS.
>

It is expected that GFS2 would do better in this area butt this does
*not* imply GFS(1) is not fixable. One thing would be helpful is sending
us the benchmark (or test program that can reasonably represent your
application IO patterns) you used to generate the performance data. Then
we'll see what can be done from there ....

-- Wendy


--
Linux-cluster mailing list
Linux-cluster redhat com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]