Displaying 7 results from an estimated 7 matches for "size1mb".
Did you mean:
size1
2018 May 23
0
cluster brick logs filling after upgrade from 3.6 to 3.12
...soon here and really don?t want to have this happening on that one as well.
Here are the NFS settings for the volume in Gluster:
$ sudo gluster volume get sharedvol all | grep nfs
performance.nfs.flush-behind on
performance.nfs.write-behind-window-size1MB
performance.nfs.strict-o-direct off
performance.nfs.strict-write-ordering off
performance.nfs.write-behind on
performance.nfs.rea...
2019 Dec 28
1
GFS performance under heavy traffic
...ce.nfs.flush-behind ? ? ? ? ? ?on ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
>> performance.write-behind-window-size ? ?1MB ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
>> performance.resync-failed-syncs-after-fsyncoff ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
>> performance.nfs.write-behind-window-size1MB ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
>> performance.strict-o-direct ? ? ? ? ? ? off ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
>> performance.nfs.strict-o-direct ? ? ? ? off ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
>> performance.strict-write-ordering ? ? ? off ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?...
2019 Dec 27
0
GFS performance under heavy traffic
...t; performance.nfs.flush-behind ? ? ? ? ? ?on ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
> performance.write-behind-window-size ? ?1MB ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
> performance.resync-failed-syncs-after-fsyncoff ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
> performance.nfs.write-behind-window-size1MB ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
> performance.strict-o-direct ? ? ? ? ? ? off ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
> performance.nfs.strict-o-direct ? ? ? ? off ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
> performance.strict-write-ordering ? ? ? off ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
>...
2019 Dec 24
1
GFS performance under heavy traffic
Hi David,
On Dec 24, 2019 02:47, David Cunningham <dcunningham at voisonics.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> In testing we found that actually the GFS client having access to all 3 nodes made no difference to performance. Perhaps that's because the 3rd node that wasn't accessible from the client before was the arbiter node?
It makes sense, as no data is being generated towards
2018 Mar 19
3
Gluster very poor performance when copying small files (1x (2+1) = 3, SSD)
Hi,
On 03/19/2018 03:42 PM, TomK wrote:
> On 3/19/2018 5:42 AM, Ondrej Valousek wrote:
> Removing NFS or NFS Ganesha from the equation, not very impressed on my
> own setup either.? For the writes it's doing, that's alot of CPU usage
> in top. Seems bottle-necked via a single execution core somewhere trying
> to facilitate read / writes to the other bricks.
>
>
2017 Sep 29
2
nfs-ganesha locking problems
...erformance.least-rate-limit 0
performance.cache-size 128MB
performance.flush-behind on
performance.nfs.flush-behind on
performance.write-behind-window-size 1MB
performance.resync-failed-syncs-after-fsyncoff
performance.nfs.write-behind-window-size1MB
performance.strict-o-direct off
performance.nfs.strict-o-direct off
performance.strict-write-ordering off
performance.nfs.strict-write-ordering off
performance.lazy-open yes
performance.read-after-open no
performance.read-ahead-page-count...
2018 Feb 26
1
Problems with write-behind with large files on Gluster 3.8.4
...performance.nfs.flush-behind on
performance.write-behind-window-size 8MB
performance.resync-failed-syncs-after-fsyncon
performance.nfs.write-behind-window-size1MB
performance.strict-o-direct off
performance.nfs.strict-o-direct off
performance.strict-write-ordering off
performance.nfs.str...