similar to: So how badly will Gluster be affected by the Intel 'fix'

On 01/04/2018 12:58 PM, WK wrote: > I'm reading that the new kernel will slow down context switches. That is > of course a big deal with FUSE mounts. > > Has anybody installed the new kernels yet and observed any performance > degradation? We are in the process of testing the same out. Hopefully later next week we would be able to post the numbers that we observe. Other

The Gluster community is pleased to announce the release of Gluster 4.0.1 (packages available at [1]). Release notes for the release can be found at [2]. Thanks, Gluster community [1] Packages: https://download.gluster.org/pub/gluster/glusterfs/4.0/4.0.1/ [2] Release notes: https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/blob/v4.0.1/doc/release-notes/4.0.1.md

Go to [1], click on CentOS, the README.txt has links to the CentOS Storage SIG where you can find information on installing RPMs from the CentOS Storage SIG. On 03/27/2018 08:53 PM, Thing wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks, any howtos/docs/notes for installing gluster4.0.x on Centos 7 > please? > > On 27 March 2018 at 01:28, Shyam Ranganathan <srangana at redhat.com >

I'm looking at tuning up a new site and the bonding issue came up A google search reveals that the gluster docs (and Lindsay) recommend balance-alb bonding. However, "team"ing came up which I wasn't familiar with. Its already in RH6/7 and Ubuntu and their Github page implies its stable. The libteam.org people seem to feel their solution is more lightweight and it seems easy

On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 02:57:55PM +1300, Thing wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks, yes, not very familiar with Centos and hence googling took a while > to find a 4.0 version at, > > https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Storage The announcement for Gluster 4.0 in CentOS should contain all the details that you need as well:

OK, at least its not an *issue* with Gluster. I didn't expect any but you never know. I have been amused at the 'lack' of discussion on Teaming performance found on Google searches. There are lots of 'here it is and here is how to set it up' articles/posts, but no 'ooh-wee-wow it is awesome' comments. It seems that for most people Bonding has worked it kinks out

Hi, Thanks, any howtos/docs/notes for installing gluster4.0.x on Centos 7 please? On 27 March 2018 at 01:28, Shyam Ranganathan <srangana at redhat.com> wrote: > The Gluster community is pleased to announce the release of Gluster > 4.0.1 (packages available at [1]). > > Release notes for the release can be found at [2]. > > Thanks, > Gluster community > > [1]

+1 Agree with Shyam. We can make more releases, but let's not stop release cycle. On 12-Oct-2017 8:32 PM, "Shyam Ranganathan" <srangana at redhat.com> wrote: On 10/12/2017 08:09 AM, Jiffin Tony Thottan wrote: > >> [2] : https://review.gluster.org/#/c/18489/ >> >> [1] : https://review.gluster.org/18506 >>

Hi, Thanks, yes, not very familiar with Centos and hence googling took a while to find a 4.0 version at, https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Storage On 28 March 2018 at 14:37, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY <kkeithle at redhat.com> wrote: > > Go to [1], click on CentOS, the README.txt has links to the CentOS > Storage SIG where you can find information on installing RPMs from the

I think we are missing 3.12.7 in CentOS releases. On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 4:47 AM, Niels de Vos <ndevos at redhat.com> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 02:57:55PM +1300, Thing wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Thanks, yes, not very familiar with Centos and hence googling took a while >> to find a 4.0 version at, >> >>

I haven't done any testing of performance differences, but on my oVirt/rhev i use standard bonding as that's that it supports. On the stand along gluster nodes I use teaming for bonding. Teaming may be slightly easier to manage, but not by much if you are already used to bond setups. I haven't noticed any bugs or issues using teaming. *David Gossage* *Carousel Checks Inc. | System

On 8/23/2017 10:44 PM, Pavel Szalbot wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 2:13 AM, WK <wkmail at bneit.com> wrote: >> The default timeout for most OS versions is 30 seconds and the Gluster >> timeout is 42, so yes you can trigger an RO event. > I get read-only mount within approximately 2 seconds after failed IO. Hmm, we don't see that, even on busy VMs. We

Hi Shyam, 2018-03-01 22:08 GMT-03:00 Shyam Ranganathan <srangana at redhat.com>: > On 02/28/2018 07:25 AM, Javier Romero wrote: >> This one fails http://cbs.centos.org/kojifiles/work/tasks/1548/311548/centos-release-gluster40-0.9-1.el7.centos.x86_64.rpm >> >> # yum install -y >>

On 03/05/2018 09:05 AM, Javier Romero wrote: >> I am about halfway through my own upgrade testing (using centOS7 >> containers), and it is patterned around this [1], in case that helps. > Taking a look at this. > > Thanks for confirming the install of the bits. On the upgrade front, I did find some issues that are since fixed. We are in the process for rolling out the GA

I'm on 3.10.5. Its rock solid (at least with the fuse mount <Grin>) We are also typically on a somewhat slower GlusterFS LAN network (bonded 2x1G, jumbo frames) so that may be a factor. I'll try to setup a trusted pool to test libgfapi soon. I'm curious as to how much faster it is, but the fuse mount is fast enough, dirt simple to use, and just works on all VM ops such as

On 4 October 2017 at 23:34, WK <wkmail at bneit.com> wrote: > Just so I know. > > Is it correct to assume that this corruption issue is ONLY involved if you > are doing rebalancing with sharding enabled. > > So if I am not doing rebalancing I should be fine? > That is correct. > -bill > > > > On 10/3/2017 10:30 PM, Krutika Dhananjay wrote: > >

Mh, not so sure really, using libgfapi and it's been working perfectly fine. And trust me, there had been A LOT of various crashes, reboots and kill of nodes. Maybe it's a version thing ? A new bug in the new gluster releases that doesn't affect our 3.7.15. On Sat, Sep 09, 2017 at 10:19:24AM -0700, WK wrote: > Well, that makes me feel better. > > I've seen all these

Hi, On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 2:13 AM, WK <wkmail at bneit.com> wrote: > The default timeout for most OS versions is 30 seconds and the Gluster > timeout is 42, so yes you can trigger an RO event. I get read-only mount within approximately 2 seconds after failed IO. > Though it is easy enough to raise as Pavel mentioned > > # echo 90 > /sys/block/sda/device/timeout AFAIK

On 10/31/2017 08:36 PM, Ben Turner wrote: >> * Erasure coded volumes with sharding - seen as a good fit for VM disk >> storage > I am working on this with a customer, we have been able to do 400-500 MB / sec writes! Normally things max out at ~150-250. The trick is to use multiple files, create the lvm stack and use native LVM striping. We have found that 4-6 files seems to give

On 02/28/2018 07:25 AM, Javier Romero wrote: > This one fails http://cbs.centos.org/kojifiles/work/tasks/1548/311548/centos-release-gluster40-0.9-1.el7.centos.x86_64.rpm > > # yum install -y > https://buildlogs.centos.org/centos/7/storage/x86_64/gluster-4.0/glusterfs-4.0.0-0.1.rc1.el7.x86_64.rpm Thanks Javier. Isn't this what you intended though? yum upgrade