Gluster users - Dec 2018 - Samba+Gluster: Performance measurements for small files

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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20181218/9d5bb61f/attachment.html>

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 <spisla80 at gmail.com>
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
> Gluster-users at gluster.org
> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users


-- 
Amar Tumballi (amarts)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20190122/75abefbc/attachment.html>