Displaying 17 results from an estimated 17 matches for "doewnload".
Did you mean:
doawnload
2017 Jun 30
2
Very slow performance on Sharded GlusterFS
...uster:
250-300mb/s
Now same test without Stripe but with sharding. This results are same when I
set shard size 4MB or 32MB. (Again 2x Replica here)
Dd performance: 70mb/s
Download directly to the gluster performance : 60mb/s
Now, If we do this test twice at the same time (two dd or two doewnload at
the same time) it goes below 25/mb each or slower.
I thought sharding is at least equal or a little slower (maybe?) but these
results are terribly slow.
I tried tuning (cache, window-size etc..). Nothing helps.
GlusterFS 3.11 and Debian 9 used. Kernel also tuned. Disks are "xfs&...
2017 Jun 30
1
Very slow performance on Sharded GlusterFS
...uster:
250-300mb/s
Now same test without Stripe but with sharding. This results are same when I
set shard size 4MB or 32MB. (Again 2x Replica here)
Dd performance: 70mb/s
Download directly to the gluster performance : 60mb/s
Now, If we do this test twice at the same time (two dd or two doewnload at
the same time) it goes below 25/mb each or slower.
I thought sharding is at least equal or a little slower (maybe?) but these
results are terribly slow.
I tried tuning (cache, window-size etc..). Nothing helps.
GlusterFS 3.11 and Debian 9 used. Kernel also tuned. Disks are "xfs&...
2017 Jun 30
0
Very slow performance on Sharded GlusterFS
...tripe but with sharding. This results are same when
> I set shard size 4MB or 32MB. (Again 2x Replica here)
>
>
>
> Dd performance: 70mb/s
>
> Download directly to the gluster performance : 60mb/s
>
>
>
> Now, If we do this test twice at the same time (two dd or two doewnload at
> the same time) it goes below 25/mb each or slower.
>
>
>
> I thought sharding is at least equal or a little slower (maybe?) but these
> results are terribly slow.
>
>
>
> I tried tuning (cache, window-size etc..). Nothing helps.
>
>
>
> GlusterFS 3.11...
2017 Jun 30
3
Very slow performance on Sharded GlusterFS
...uster: 250-300mb/s
Now same test without Stripe but with sharding. This results are same when I set shard size 4MB or 32MB. (Again 2x Replica here)
Dd performance: 70mb/s
Download directly to the gluster performance : 60mb/s
Now, If we do this test twice at the same time (two dd or two doewnload at the same time) it goes below 25/mb each or slower.
I thought sharding is at least equal or a little slower (maybe?) but these results are terribly slow.
I tried tuning (cache, window-size etc..). Nothing helps.
GlusterFS 3.11 and Debian 9 used. Kernel also tuned. Disks are ?xfs? and...
2017 Jun 30
1
Very slow performance on Sharded GlusterFS
...tripe but with sharding. This results are same when
> I set shard size 4MB or 32MB. (Again 2x Replica here)
>
>
>
> Dd performance: 70mb/s
>
> Download directly to the gluster performance : 60mb/s
>
>
>
> Now, If we do this test twice at the same time (two dd or two doewnload at
> the same time) it goes below 25/mb each or slower.
>
>
>
> I thought sharding is at least equal or a little slower (maybe?) but these
> results are terribly slow.
>
>
>
> I tried tuning (cache, window-size etc..). Nothing helps.
>
>
>
> GlusterFS 3.11...
2017 Jul 27
0
Very slow performance on Sharded GlusterFS
...with sharding. This results are same
> when I set shard size 4MB or 32MB. (Again 2x Replica here)
>
>
>
> Dd performance: 70mb/s
>
> Download directly to the gluster performance : 60mb/s
>
>
>
> Now, If we do this test twice at the same time (two dd or two
> doewnload at the same time) it goes below 25/mb each or slower.
>
>
>
> I thought sharding is at least equal or a little slower (maybe?) but
> these results are terribly slow.
>
>
>
> I tried tuning (cache, window-size etc..). Nothing helps.
>
>
>
> GlusterFS 3.11...
2017 Jul 03
0
Very slow performance on Sharded GlusterFS
...uster: 250-300mb/s
Now same test without Stripe but with sharding. This results are same when I set shard size 4MB or 32MB. (Again 2x Replica here)
Dd performance: 70mb/s
Download directly to the gluster performance : 60mb/s
Now, If we do this test twice at the same time (two dd or two doewnload at the same time) it goes below 25/mb each or slower.
I thought sharding is at least equal or a little slower (maybe?) but these results are terribly slow.
I tried tuning (cache, window-size etc..). Nothing helps.
GlusterFS 3.11 and Debian 9 used. Kernel also tuned. Disks are ?xfs? and...
2017 Jul 04
2
Very slow performance on Sharded GlusterFS
...tripe but with sharding. This results are same when
> I set shard size 4MB or 32MB. (Again 2x Replica here)
>
>
>
> Dd performance: 70mb/s
>
> Download directly to the gluster performance : 60mb/s
>
>
>
> Now, If we do this test twice at the same time (two dd or two doewnload at
> the same time) it goes below 25/mb each or slower.
>
>
>
> I thought sharding is at least equal or a little slower (maybe?) but these
> results are terribly slow.
>
>
>
> I tried tuning (cache, window-size etc..). Nothing helps.
>
>
>
> GlusterFS 3.11...
2017 Jul 04
2
Very slow performance on Sharded GlusterFS
...tripe but with sharding. This results are same when
> I set shard size 4MB or 32MB. (Again 2x Replica here)
>
>
>
> Dd performance: 70mb/s
>
> Download directly to the gluster performance : 60mb/s
>
>
>
> Now, If we do this test twice at the same time (two dd or two doewnload at
> the same time) it goes below 25/mb each or slower.
>
>
>
> I thought sharding is at least equal or a little slower (maybe?) but these
> results are terribly slow.
>
>
>
> I tried tuning (cache, window-size etc..). Nothing helps.
>
>
>
> GlusterFS 3.11...
2017 Jul 04
0
Very slow performance on Sharded GlusterFS
...uster: 250-300mb/s
Now same test without Stripe but with sharding. This results are same when I set shard size 4MB or 32MB. (Again 2x Replica here)
Dd performance: 70mb/s
Download directly to the gluster performance : 60mb/s
Now, If we do this test twice at the same time (two dd or two doewnload at the same time) it goes below 25/mb each or slower.
I thought sharding is at least equal or a little slower (maybe?) but these results are terribly slow.
I tried tuning (cache, window-size etc..). Nothing helps.
GlusterFS 3.11 and Debian 9 used. Kernel also tuned. Disks are ?xfs? and...
2017 Jul 06
0
Very slow performance on Sharded GlusterFS
...me
>> when I set shard size 4MB or 32MB. (Again 2x Replica here)
>>
>>
>>
>> Dd performance: 70mb/s
>>
>> Download directly to the gluster performance : 60mb/s
>>
>>
>>
>> Now, If we do this test twice at the same time (two dd or two doewnload
>> at the same time) it goes below 25/mb each or slower.
>>
>>
>>
>> I thought sharding is at least equal or a little slower (maybe?) but
>> these results are terribly slow.
>>
>>
>>
>> I tried tuning (cache, window-size etc..). Nothing he...
2017 Jul 06
2
Very slow performance on Sharded GlusterFS
...uster: 250-300mb/s
Now same test without Stripe but with sharding. This results are same when I set shard size 4MB or 32MB. (Again 2x Replica here)
Dd performance: 70mb/s
Download directly to the gluster performance : 60mb/s
Now, If we do this test twice at the same time (two dd or two doewnload at the same time) it goes below 25/mb each or slower.
I thought sharding is at least equal or a little slower (maybe?) but these results are terribly slow.
I tried tuning (cache, window-size etc..). Nothing helps.
GlusterFS 3.11 and Debian 9 used. Kernel also tuned. Disks are ?xfs? and...
2017 Jun 30
3
Very slow performance on Sharded GlusterFS
...uster: 250-300mb/s
Now same test without Stripe but with sharding. This results are same when I set shard size 4MB or 32MB. (Again 2x Replica here)
Dd performance: 70mb/s
Download directly to the gluster performance : 60mb/s
Now, If we do this test twice at the same time (two dd or two doewnload at the same time) it goes below 25/mb each or slower.
I thought sharding is at least equal or a little slower (maybe?) but these results are terribly slow.
I tried tuning (cache, window-size etc..). Nothing helps.
GlusterFS 3.11 and Debian 9 used. Kernel also tuned. Disks are ?xfs? and...
2017 Jul 06
0
Very slow performance on Sharded GlusterFS
...uster: 250-300mb/s
Now same test without Stripe but with sharding. This results are same when I set shard size 4MB or 32MB. (Again 2x Replica here)
Dd performance: 70mb/s
Download directly to the gluster performance : 60mb/s
Now, If we do this test twice at the same time (two dd or two doewnload at the same time) it goes below 25/mb each or slower.
I thought sharding is at least equal or a little slower (maybe?) but these results are terribly slow.
I tried tuning (cache, window-size etc..). Nothing helps.
GlusterFS 3.11 and Debian 9 used. Kernel also tuned. Disks are ?xfs? and...
2017 Jul 06
2
Very slow performance on Sharded GlusterFS
...uster: 250-300mb/s
Now same test without Stripe but with sharding. This results are same when I set shard size 4MB or 32MB. (Again 2x Replica here)
Dd performance: 70mb/s
Download directly to the gluster performance : 60mb/s
Now, If we do this test twice at the same time (two dd or two doewnload at the same time) it goes below 25/mb each or slower.
I thought sharding is at least equal or a little slower (maybe?) but these results are terribly slow.
I tried tuning (cache, window-size etc..). Nothing helps.
GlusterFS 3.11 and Debian 9 used. Kernel also tuned. Disks are ?xfs? and...
2017 Jul 10
0
Very slow performance on Sharded GlusterFS
...uster: 250-300mb/s
Now same test without Stripe but with sharding. This results are same when I set shard size 4MB or 32MB. (Again 2x Replica here)
Dd performance: 70mb/s
Download directly to the gluster performance : 60mb/s
Now, If we do this test twice at the same time (two dd or two doewnload at the same time) it goes below 25/mb each or slower.
I thought sharding is at least equal or a little slower (maybe?) but these results are terribly slow.
I tried tuning (cache, window-size etc..). Nothing helps.
GlusterFS 3.11 and Debian 9 used. Kernel also tuned. Disks are ?xfs? and...
2017 Jul 12
1
Very slow performance on Sharded GlusterFS
...tripe but with sharding. This results are same when
> I set shard size 4MB or 32MB. (Again 2x Replica here)
>
>
>
> Dd performance: 70mb/s
>
> Download directly to the gluster performance : 60mb/s
>
>
>
> Now, If we do this test twice at the same time (two dd or two doewnload at
> the same time) it goes below 25/mb each or slower.
>
>
>
> I thought sharding is at least equal or a little slower (maybe?) but these
> results are terribly slow.
>
>
>
> I tried tuning (cache, window-size etc..). Nothing helps.
>
>
>
> GlusterFS 3.11...