search for: 29522

I need to replace my Abit BE7 board (cannot run the newer Linux) and keep my near new IDE HD's (250 GB). A D865GLC is new available that uses the Intel 865G chip set, but I have no experience in matching Mobo's with Linux. Todd -- Ariste Software 2200 D Street Ext Petaluma, CA 94952 (707) 773-4523

...2048B, (W) 2048B-2048B, (T) 2048B-2048B, ioengine=libaio, iodepth=32 fio-3.1 Starting 1 process Jobs: 1 (f=1): [w(1)][100.0%][r=0KiB/s,w=8624KiB/s][r=0,w=4312 IOPS][eta 00m:00s] test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=42781: Tue Mar 20 15:05:57 2018 write: IOPS=4439, BW=8880KiB/s (9093kB/s)(256MiB/29522msec) bw ( KiB/s): min= 6908, max= 9564, per=99.94%, avg=8874.03, stdev=428.92, samples=59 iops : min= 3454, max= 4782, avg=4437.00, stdev=214.44, samples=59 cpu : usr=2.43%, sys=18.18%, ctx=262222, majf=0, minf=8 IO depths : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=...

On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 8:57 AM, Sam McLeod <mailinglists at smcleod.net> wrote: > Hi Raghavendra, > > > On 20 Mar 2018, at 1:55 pm, Raghavendra Gowdappa <rgowdapp at redhat.com> > wrote: > > Aggregating large number of small writes by write-behind into large writes > has been merged on master: > https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/364 > >

Help please- I am running 3.3.1 on Centos using a 10GB network. I get reasonable write speeds, although I think they could be faster. But my read speeds are REALLY slow. Executive summary: On gluster client- Writes average about 700-800MB/s Reads average about 70-80MB/s On server- Writes average about 1-1.5GB/s Reads average about 2-3GB/s Any thoughts? Here are some additional details:

I apologize for the first message. :) --------------------------------------- I have an FTP server running in the DMZ section of my home network. It uses port 23000 for connection and ports 19990 to 19994 for data transfer. I have setup the following rule for outside people to connect to it: DNAT net dmz:192.168.2.2 tcp 23000 I''m at work right now and I can''t use

v1 was here: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2016-March/thread.html#00157 Not running the 'hwclock' command reduces boot times considerably. However I'm not sure if it is safe. See the question I posted on qemu-devel: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.qemu/402194 At the moment, about 50% of the time is consumed by SeaBIOS. Of this, about ⅓rd is SGABIOS