similar to: Expected performance for WORM scenario

On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 6:23 PM, Ondrej Valousek < Ondrej.Valousek at s3group.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Gluster will never perform well for small files. > > I believe there is nothing you can do with this. > It is bad compared to a disk filesystem but I believe it is much closer to NFS now. Andreas, Looking at your workload, I am suspecting there to be lot of LOOKUPs

Hi, Can you send us the following details: 1. gluster volume info 2. What client you are using to run this? Thanks, Nithya On 12 March 2018 at 18:16, Andreas Ericsson <andreas.ericsson at findity.com> wrote: > Heya fellas. > > I've been struggling quite a lot to get glusterfs to perform even > halfdecently with a write-intensive workload. Testnumbers are from gluster >

Hi, Gluster will never perform well for small files. I believe there is nothing you can do with this. Ondrej From: gluster-users-bounces at gluster.org [mailto:gluster-users-bounces at gluster.org] On Behalf Of Andreas Ericsson Sent: Monday, March 12, 2018 1:47 PM To: Gluster-users at gluster.org Subject: [Gluster-users] Expected performance for WORM scenario Heya fellas. I've been

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 1:37 PM, Ondrej Valousek < Ondrej.Valousek at s3group.com> wrote: > Well, it might be close to the _*synchronous*_ nfs, but it is still well > behind of the asynchronous nfs performance. > > Simple script (bit extreme I know, but helps to draw the picture): > > > > #!/bin/csh > > > > set HOSTNAME=`/bin/hostname` > > set j=1

That seems unlikely. I pre-create the directory layout and then write to directories I know exist. I don't quite understand how any settings at all can reduce performance to 1/5000 of what I get when writing straight to ramdisk though, and especially when running on a single node instead of in a cluster. Has anyone else set this up and managed to get better write performance? On 13 March

Well, it might be close to the _synchronous_ nfs, but it is still well behind of the asynchronous nfs performance. Simple script (bit extreme I know, but helps to draw the picture): #!/bin/csh set HOSTNAME=`/bin/hostname` set j=1 while ($j <= 7000) echo ahoj > test.$HOSTNAME.$j @ j++ end rm -rf test.$HOSTNAME.* Takes 9 seconds to execute on the NFS share, but 90 seconds on

Yes, I have had this in place already (well except of the negative cache, but enabling that did not make much effect). To me, this is no surprise ? nothing can match nfs performance for small files for obvious reasons: 1. Single server, does not have to deal with distributed locks 2. Afaik, gluster does not support read/write delegations the same way NFS does. 3. Glusterfs is

We can't stick to single server because the law. Redundancy is a legal requirement for our business. I'm sort of giving up on gluster though. It would seem a pretty stupid content addressable storage would suit our needs better. On 13 March 2018 at 10:12, Ondrej Valousek <Ondrej.Valousek at s3group.com> wrote: > Yes, I have had this in place already (well except of the negative

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 2:42 PM, Ondrej Valousek < Ondrej.Valousek at s3group.com> wrote: > Yes, I have had this in place already (well except of the negative cache, > but enabling that did not make much effect). > > To me, this is no surprise ? nothing can match nfs performance for small > files for obvious reasons: > Could you give profile info of the run you did with

Hi, some more info on the previous admw0rm alert. Fwd'd from BugTraq Greetings, Jan-Philip Velders ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 21:17:40 +0100 From: Mixter <mixter@HOME.POPMAIL.COM> To: BUGTRAQ@NETSPACE.ORG Subject: Re: ADM Worm. Worm for Linux x86 found in wild. The "ADM w0rm" is public and can be found at:

On Fri, 26 Mar 1999, Thomas Biege wrote: > Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 09:34:10 +0100 (MET) > From: Thomas Biege <thomas@suse.de> > To: Jan-Philip Velders <jpv@jvelders.tn.tudelft.nl> > Cc: linux-security@redhat.com > Subject: Re: [Security - intern] [linux-security] *ALERT*: ADM Worm. Worm for Linux x86 found in wild. > The worm just exploits old security holes, so

Hi, I am trying to interpret the coefficients in the model: RateOfMotorPlay ~ TestNumber + Sex + TestNumber * Sex where there are thee different tests and Sex is (obviously) binary. My results are: Residuals: Min 1Q Median 3Q Max -86.90 -26.28 -7.68 22.52 123.74 Coefficients: Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|) (Intercept) 29.430 6.248

-=> To moderator: I don't know whether it's wise to release the FTP-location I would recommend everyone to just look over their daemons, and run something like nessus against theirselves... Greetings, Jan-Philip Velders ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 16:26:59 -0700 From: "Ben Cantrick (Macky Stingray)" <mackys@MACKY.RONIN.NET> To:

Il messaggio sotto riportato, spedito dal vostro indirizzo di posta, contiene un VIRUS e pertanto non ? stato consegnato. Probabilmente il computer dal quale ? stato spedito ? infetto. CONTROLLATELO QUANTO PRIMA CON UN PROGRAMMA ANTIVIRUS! A message containing a virus was sent from your e-mail address. It is very likely this machine (or any other you use for e-mail) is infected! CHECK IT AS SOON

I have received the below notice about the rsync list. There is a worm among us. ------- Forwarded message follows ------- Return-Path: <postmaster@innevi.com> Received: from bleep.innevi.com ([64.30.26.9]) by mail.dubois-king.COM (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i1K7n3p14977 for <ppalumbo@dubois-king.com>; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 02:49:03 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain;

VIRUS ALERT Our content checker found virus: Worm.SomeFool.Gen-2 in email presumably from you (<logcheck-devel at lists.alioth.debian.org>), to the following recipient: -> barbier at linuxfr.org Please check your system for viruses, or ask your system administrator to do so. Delivery of the email was stopped! For your reference, here are headers from your email:

GlusterFS WORM hard links will not be created OS is CentOS7 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20170707/aaea8dfc/attachment.html>

hard linksA read-only file system does not produce a hard link in GlusterFS WORM mode. Is it impossible? OS is CentOS7 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20170710/837d3179/attachment.html> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: error.png

Hello Gluster Community, while reading that article: https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs-specs/blob/master/under_review/worm-compliance.md there seems to be an interesting feature planned for the WORM Xlator: *Scheduled Auto-commit*: Scan Triggered Using timeouts for untouched files. The next scheduled namespace scan will cause the transition. CTR DB via libgfdb can be used to find files that

VIRUS ALERT Il sistema di scansione ha rilevato un problema in una email presumibilmente inviata da Lei -> (<openssh-unix-dev at mindrot.org>), per il seguente destinatario: -> agtd09000r at istruzione.it La consegna del messaggio non e' potuta avvenire Di seguito i riferimenti della e-Mail inviata: ------------------------- BEGIN HEADERS -----------------------------