Bug 1489823 - set the shard-block-size to 64MB in virt profile
Summary: set the shard-block-size to 64MB in virt profile
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: GlusterFS
Classification: Community
Component: sharding
Version: mainline
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
urgent
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: bugs@gluster.org
QA Contact: bugs@gluster.org
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 1468969 1492026
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2017-09-08 12:25 UTC by Krutika Dhananjay
Modified: 2017-12-08 17:40 UTC (History)
8 users (show)

Fixed In Version: glusterfs-3.13.0
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of: 1468969
: 1492026 (view as bug list)
Environment:
Last Closed: 2017-12-08 17:40:26 UTC
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Krutika Dhananjay 2017-09-08 12:25:15 UTC
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #1468969 +++

Description of problem:
-----------------------
The better performance was observed with the shard-size of 128MB.
Virt profile should have this attribute and so its set on the volume when the volume is optimized for virt-profile

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
-------------------------------------------------------------


How reproducible:
-----------------
NA

Steps to Reproduce:
-------------------
NA

Actual results:
---------------
Shard-size is set to 4MB

Expected results:
-----------------
shard-size should be set to 128MB so that perf improvement is observed

--- Additional comment from SATHEESARAN on 2017-07-10 02:52:40 EDT ---

At the moment, performance tests are done with different values and the value is yet to finalized based on the perf tests


--- Additional comment from Atin Mukherjee on 2017-09-07 06:32:37 EDT ---

When would the recommended shard-size can be provided so that the required changes can be done?

--- Additional comment from SATHEESARAN on 2017-09-07 06:34:14 EDT ---

(In reply to Atin Mukherjee from comment #4)
> When would the recommended shard-size can be provided so that the required
> changes can be done?

The recommended value is 64MB

Comment 1 Worker Ant 2017-09-08 12:35:56 UTC
REVIEW: https://review.gluster.org/18243 (features/shard: Change default shard-block-size to 64MB) posted (#1) for review on master by Krutika Dhananjay (kdhananj)

Comment 2 Worker Ant 2017-09-13 09:37:32 UTC
REVIEW: https://review.gluster.org/18243 (features/shard: Change default shard-block-size to 64MB) posted (#2) for review on master by Krutika Dhananjay (kdhananj)

Comment 3 Worker Ant 2017-09-13 12:46:42 UTC
REVIEW: https://review.gluster.org/18243 (features/shard: Change default shard-block-size to 64MB) posted (#3) for review on master by Krutika Dhananjay (kdhananj)

Comment 4 Worker Ant 2017-09-14 03:23:19 UTC
COMMIT: https://review.gluster.org/18243 committed in master by Pranith Kumar Karampuri (pkarampu) 
------
commit e4a59b384f5bbaaeb937a53cef64f4e388f85153
Author: Krutika Dhananjay <kdhananj>
Date:   Fri Sep 8 18:04:50 2017 +0530

    features/shard: Change default shard-block-size to 64MB
    
    Change-Id: I55fa87e07136cff10b0d725ee24dd3151016e64e
    BUG: 1489823
    Signed-off-by: Krutika Dhananjay <kdhananj>
    Reviewed-on: https://review.gluster.org/18243
    Reviewed-by: Pranith Kumar Karampuri <pkarampu>
    Smoke: Gluster Build System <jenkins.org>
    Tested-by: Sunil Kumar Acharya <sheggodu>
    CentOS-regression: Gluster Build System <jenkins.org>

Comment 5 Shyamsundar 2017-12-08 17:40:26 UTC
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/


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.