similar to: Gluster command performance - Setting volume options slow

FYI - I've been testing the Gluster 3.12.1 packages with the help of the SIG maintainer and I can confirm that the logs are no longer being filled with NFS or null client errors after the upgrade. -- Sam McLeod @s_mcleod https://smcleod.net > On 18 Sep 2017, at 10:14 pm, Sam McLeod <mailinglists at smcleod.net> wrote: > > Thanks Milind, > > Yes I?m hanging out for

Excellent description, thank you. With performance.write-behind-trickling-writes ON (default): ## 4k randwrite # fio --randrepeat=1 --ioengine=libaio --gtod_reduce=1 --name=test --filename=test --bs=4k --iodepth=32 --size=256MB --readwrite=randwrite test: (g=0): rw=randwrite, bs=(R) 4096B-4096B, (W) 4096B-4096B, (T) 4096B-4096B, ioengine=libaio, iodepth=32 fio-3.1 Starting 1 process Jobs: 1

Hi Niels, FYI - tested the install of the 3.13.0-1.el7 packages and all seems well with the install under CentOS 7. yum install -y https://cbs.centos.org/kojifiles/packages/centos-release-gluster313/1.0/1.el7.centos/noarch/centos-release-gluster313-1.0-1.el7.centos.noarch.rpm

By chance... it's not 3 replica, 1 arbiter is it? See: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1512371 <https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1512371> -- Sam McLeod https://smcleod.net https://twitter.com/s_mcleod -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hi Serkan, I was wondering if you resolved your issue with the high CPU usage and hang after starting gluster? I'm setting up a 3 server (replica 3, arbiter 1), 300 volume, Gluster 3.12 cluster on CentOS 7 and am having what looks to be exactly the same issue as you. With no volumes created CPU usage / load is normal, but after creating all the volumes even with no data CPU and RAM usage

> On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 4:22 PM, Amye Scavarda <amye at redhat.com <mailto:amye at redhat.com>> wrote: > From today's community meeting, we had an item from the issue queue: > https://github.com/gluster/community/issues/13 <https://github.com/gluster/community/issues/13> > > Should we have a Gluster Community slack team? I'm interested in >

> On 6 Nov 2017, at 3:32 pm, Laura Bailey <lbailey at redhat.com> wrote: > > Do the users have permission to see/interact with the directories, in addition to the files? Yes, full access to directories and files. Also testing using the root user. > > On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 1:55 PM, Nithya Balachandran <nbalacha at redhat.com <mailto:nbalacha at redhat.com>>

10 seconds is a very long time for files to go away for applications used at any scale, it is however what I've set our failover time to after being shocked by the default of 42 seconds. -- Sam McLeod https://smcleod.net https://twitter.com/s_mcleod > On 27 Dec 2017, at 10:17 pm, Omar Kohl <omar.kohl at iternity.com> wrote: > > Hi, > >> If you set it to 10 seconds,

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 <https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/364> > > Would like to know whether it helps for this usecase.

Sam, For du ?sh on my newer volume, the result is 161T. The sum of the Used space in the df ?h output for all the bricks is ~163T. Close enough for me to believe everything is there. The total for used space in the df ?h of the mountpoint it 83T, roughly half what is used. Relevant lines from df ?h on server-A: Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda1 59T 42T

Thanks Milind, Yes I?m hanging out for CentOS?s Storage / Gluster SIG to release the packages for 3.12.1, I can see the packages were built a week ago but they?re still not on the repo :( -- Sam > On 18 Sep 2017, at 9:57 pm, Milind Changire <mchangir at redhat.com> wrote: > > Sam, > You might want to give glusterfs-3.12.1 a try instead. > > > >> On Fri, Sep

We noticed something similar. Out of interest, does du -sh . show the same size? -- Sam McLeod (protoporpoise on IRC) https://smcleod.net https://twitter.com/s_mcleod Words are my own opinions and do not necessarily represent those of my employer or partners. > On 31 Jan 2018, at 12:47 pm, Freer, Eva B. <freereb at ornl.gov> wrote: > > After OS update to CentOS 7.4 or RedHat

We've got an issue with Gluster (3.12.x) where clients can't see directories that exist or are created within a mounted volume. We can see files, but not directories (with ls, find etc...) We can enter (cd) into directories, even if we can't see them. - Host typology is: 2 replica, 1 arbiter. - Volumes are: replicated and running on XFS on the hosts. - Clients are: GlusterFS native

Hi, Please provide the gluster volume info. Do you see any errors in the client mount log file (/var/log/glusterfs/var-lib-mountedgluster.log)? Thanks, Nithya On 6 November 2017 at 05:13, Sam McLeod <mailinglists at smcleod.net> wrote: > We've got an issue with Gluster (3.12.x) where clients can't see > directories that exist or are created within a mounted volume. >

Sam, You might want to give glusterfs-3.12.1 a try instead. On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 6:42 AM, Sam McLeod <mailinglists at smcleod.net> wrote: > Howdy, > > I'm setting up several gluster 3.12 clusters running on CentOS 7 and have > having issues with glusterd.log and glustershd.log both being filled with > errors relating to null client errors and client-callback

Howdy, I'm setting up several gluster 3.12 clusters running on CentOS 7 and have having issues with glusterd.log and glustershd.log both being filled with errors relating to null client errors and client-callback functions. They seem to be related to high CPU usage across the nodes although I don't have a way of confirming that (suggestions welcomed!). in

On 3/18/2018 6:13 PM, Sam McLeod wrote: Even your NFS transfers are 12.5 or so MB per second or less. 1) Did you use fdisk and LVM under that XFS filesystem? 2) Did you benchmark the XFS with something like bonnie++? (There's probably newer benchmark suites now.) 3) Did you benchmark your Network transfer speeds? Perhaps your NIC negotiated a lower speed. 3) I've done XFS tuning

Hi Aaron, We also find that Gluster is perhaps, not the most performant when performing actions on directories containing large numbers of files. For example, with a single NFS server on the client side a recursive chown on (many!) files took about 18 seconds, our simple two replica gluster servers took over 15 minutes. Having said that, while I'm new to the gluster world, things seem to be

Hi Niklas, Out of interest have you tried testing performance with performance.stat-prefetch enabled? -- Sam McLeod @s_mcleod https://smcleod.net > On 14 Sep 2017, at 10:42 pm, Niklas Hamb?chen <mail at nh2.me> wrote: > > Hi, > > I have a gluster 3.10 volume with a dir with ~1 million small files in > them, say mounted at /mnt/dir with FUSE, and I'm observing

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 > >