Performance problem - reads slower than writes

Brian Candler B.Candler at pobox.com
Sun Feb 5 03:05:02 CST 2012


On Sat, Feb 04, 2012 at 11:16:49PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> When you lose a disk in this setup, how do you rebuild the replacement
> drive?  Do you simply format it and then move 3TB of data across GbE
> from other Gluster nodes?

Basically, yes. When you read a file, it causes the mirror to synchronise
that particular file. To force the whole brick to come back into sync you
run find+stat across the whole filesystem.
http://download.gluster.com/pub/gluster/glusterfs/3.2/Documentation/AG/html/sect-Administration_Guide-Managing_Volumes-Self_heal.html

> Even if the disk is only 1/3rd full, such a
> restore seems like an expensive and time consuming operation.  I'm
> thinking RAID has a significant advantage here.

Well, if you lose a 3TB disk in a RAID-1 type setup, then the whole disk has
to be copied block by block (whether it contains data or not). So the
consideration here is network bandwidth.

I am building with 10GE, but even 1G would be just about sufficient to carry
the peak bandwidth of a single one of these disks.  (dd on the raw disk
gives 120MB/s at the start and 60MB/s at the end)

The whole manageability aspect certainly needs to be considered very
seriously though.  With RAID1 or RAID10, dealing with a failed disk is
pretty much pull and plug; with Gluster we'd be looking at having to mkfs
the new filesystem, mount it at the right place, and then run the self-heal. 
This will have to be weighed against the availability advantages of being
able to take an entire storage node out of service.

Regards,

Brian.



More information about the xfs mailing list