Bug 761817 (GLUSTER-85) - AFR and Point to Point Comparison
Summary: AFR and Point to Point Comparison
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Alias: GLUSTER-85
Product: GlusterFS
Classification: Community
Component: replicate
Version: pre-2.0
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
low
low
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Vikas Gorur
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2009-06-25 13:19 UTC by Basavanagowda Kanur
Modified: 2010-01-29 11:49 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:
Regression: RTNR
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
Compare CP, DU, FIND (23.64 KB, application/octet-stream)
2009-06-25 10:19 UTC, Basavanagowda Kanur
no flags Details

Description Basavanagowda Kanur 2009-06-25 13:19:26 UTC
Fri Dec 12 12:23:54 2008  	 guru - Ticket created

I am attaching the result of an experiment I did based on Avati's
request. I have tabulated the times taken for the three commands:

cp -a /usr .
du -hs usr
find . -type f | xargs cat > /dev/null

The server had posix and posix-locks.
The client had one afr over two servers (in case of AFR) or just a
protocol client (in case of point-to-point). The client in all the cases
was being run on a different machine than the servers.

The backends were cleaned each time.

Note that I did the exercise for IB and TCP.

All timings in Seconds
cp du find | cat
AFR TCP 892.16 92.72 721.48
AFR IB 604.56 96.62 231.47
P2P TCP 399.04 33.77 400.79
P2P IB 337.79 26.14 129.65

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#   	Tue Apr 07 18:17:17 2009 	gowda - Correspondence added 

avati,
why was this test recommended? what was the conclusion of the test?

did any of the enhancement, bug-fix, performance optimization that went
into glusterfs depend on this test? if yes, please update the ticket
with the details (or overview) of the changes that went into glusterfs
as a result of this test.

-- 
gowda

Comment 1 Vikas Gorur 2009-07-09 10:58:28 UTC
Test was run on an old version of GlusterFS and hence no longer meaningful.


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