Bug 1475605
| Summary: | gluster-block default shard-size should be 64MB | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Community] GlusterFS | Reporter: | Pranith Kumar K <pkarampu> | |
| Component: | core | Assignee: | bugs <bugs> | |
| Status: | CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE | QA Contact: | ||
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | ||
| Priority: | unspecified | |||
| Version: | mainline | CC: | bugs | |
| Target Milestone: | --- | |||
| Target Release: | --- | |||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | |||
| OS: | Unspecified | |||
| Whiteboard: | ||||
| Fixed In Version: | glusterfs-3.13.0 | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | ||
| Clone Of: | ||||
| : | 1476654 (view as bug list) | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2017-12-08 17:35:59 UTC | Type: | Bug | |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- | |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | ||
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | ||
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | ||
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | ||
| Embargoed: | ||||
| Bug Depends On: | ||||
| Bug Blocks: | 1476654 | |||
REVIEW: https://review.gluster.org/17887 (group-gluster-block: Set default shard-block-size to 4MB) posted (#1) for review on master by Pranith Kumar Karampuri (pkarampu) REVIEW: https://review.gluster.org/17887 (group-gluster-block: Set default shard-block-size to 64MB) posted (#2) for review on master by Pranith Kumar Karampuri (pkarampu) COMMIT: https://review.gluster.org/17887 committed in master by Krutika Dhananjay (kdhananj) ------ commit abfbc3eb821e144ddbfdc5d7da401557b52beaf1 Author: Pranith Kumar K <pkarampu> Date: Wed Jul 26 20:27:08 2017 +0530 group-gluster-block: Set default shard-block-size to 64MB With 4MB shard size I/O slows down more because of the extra inodelk/xattrops in replicate. So increasing it to 64MB which gave better performance than 4MB. To simulate writes on a preallocated VM-image, fallocate the file and then do dd with notrunc do "fallocate -l 1GB" then "dd if=/dev/zero of=file-1GB bs=1MB count=1024 conv=notrunc" These are the results on my laptop for dd: With 4MB: 1.84 1357.37 us 19.00 us 12431.00 us 1188 FINODELK 2.45 255.08 us 58.00 us 4038.00 us 8428 WRITE 95.69 78967.76 us 30.00 us 20324240.00 us 1063 FXATTROP With 64MB: 0.13 59.36 us 15.00 us 814.00 us 657 FINODELK 6.02 225.53 us 69.00 us 6556.00 us 8205 WRITE 93.82 103015.12 us 32.00 us 13046368.00 us 280 FXATTROP BUG: 1475605 Change-Id: I4ed5441409df639e38c731ba0d140fe92902f25f Signed-off-by: Pranith Kumar K <pkarampu> Reviewed-on: https://review.gluster.org/17887 CentOS-regression: Gluster Build System <jenkins.org> Smoke: Gluster Build System <jenkins.org> Reviewed-by: Krutika Dhananjay <kdhananj> This bug is getting closed because a release has been made available that should address the reported issue. In case the problem is still not fixed with glusterfs-3.13.0, please open a new bug report. glusterfs-3.13.0 has been announced on the Gluster mailinglists [1], packages for several distributions should become available in the near future. Keep an eye on the Gluster Users mailinglist [2] and the update infrastructure for your distribution. [1] http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/announce/2017-December/000087.html [2] https://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/ |
Description of problem: With 4MB shard size I/O slows down more because of the extra inodelk/xattrops in replicate. So increasing it to 64MB which gave better performance than 4MB. To simulate writes on a preallocated VM-image, fallocate the file and then do dd with notrunc do "fallocate -l 1GB" then "dd if=/dev/zero of=file-1GB bs=1MB count=1024 conv=notrunc" These are the results on my laptop for dd: With 4MB: 1.84 1357.37 us 19.00 us 12431.00 us 1188 FINODELK 2.45 255.08 us 58.00 us 4038.00 us 8428 WRITE 95.69 78967.76 us 30.00 us 20324240.00 us 1063 FXATTROP With 64MB: 0.13 59.36 us 15.00 us 814.00 us 657 FINODELK 6.02 225.53 us 69.00 us 6556.00 us 8205 WRITE 93.82 103015.12 us 32.00 us 13046368.00 us 280 FXATTROP Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info: