search for: sanergy

...quota: on nfs.disable: on Use dd (bs=1MB) or iozone (block=1MB) to test write performance, about 400MB/s. #dd if=/dev/zero of=dd.dat bs=1MB count=1k 1024+0 records in 1024+0 records out 1024000000 bytes (1.0 GB) copied, 2.6142 s, 392 MB/s But exporting with samba, use 4 Win7 clients to test with SANergy/Iometer, write performance only about 170MB/s. Command line used: iozone -s 1g -r 1m -i 0 -t 4 Output is in Kbytes/sec Time Resolution = 0.000001 seconds. Processor cache size set to 1024 Kbytes. Processor cache line size set to 32 bytes. File stride size set to 17 * record size. Throughput test wi...

...s EXT4 file system, and used as glusterfs brick. On the samba server, use dd test local ext4 and glusterfs, write bandwidth are 477MB/s and 357MB/s, details as follow. When mount cifs on Centos 6.0, write bandwidth downgrade to 184MB/s and 117MB/s, very different. Using 4 win7 clients to test with SANergy/Iometer, cifs over ext4 aggregate throughput can get about 391 MB/s. However, cifs over glusterfs aggregate throughput only can get about 180 MB/s. Why CIFS performance is so slow over glusterfs backend? Anybody meet such issues and how to resolve(samba and glusterfs parameters)? thanks a lot in...

...s EXT4 file system, and used as glusterfs brick. On the samba server, use dd test local ext4 and glusterfs, write bandwidth are 477MB/s and 357MB/s, details as follow. When mount cifs on Centos 6.0, write bandwidth downgrade to 184MB/s and 117MB/s, very different. Using 4 win7 clients to test with SANergy/Iometer, cifs over ext4 aggregate throughput can get about 391 MB/s. However, cifs over glusterfs aggregate throughput only can get about 180 MB/s. Why CIFS performance is so slow over glusterfs backend? Anybody meet such issues and how to resolve(samba and glusterfs parameters)? thanks a lot in...