No matter what you do, a standalone server would be faster than a clustered architecture, if it is GFS over SAN, or even the MySQL cluster, due to obvious reasons of latency invloved. Anyway what exactly are you trying to build with MySQL, I mean what kind of performance you want from MySQL, may be you could try Replication or if you want good scalability, then you would be better off with the MySQL cluster. Kishore Jalleda <a href="http://kjalleda.googlepages.com/projects">http://kjalleda.googlepages.com/projects</a> On 4/26/06, Sander van Beek - Elexis <<a href="mailto:sander@elexis.nl">sander@elexis.nl </a>> wrote: > Hi all, > > We did a quick benchmark on our 2 node rhel4 testcluster with gfs and > a gnbd storage server. The results were very sad. One of the nodes > (p3 1ghz, 512 mb) could run +/- 2400 insert queries per second when > running mysqld-max 5.0.20 on a local ext3 filesystem. With a 2 node > GFS over GNBD setup and inserts on both nodes at the same time, we > only could do 80 inserts per second. I'm very interested in the > perfomance others got in a similar setup. Would the performance > increase when we use software based iscsi instead of gnbd? > Or should we simply buy SAN equipment? Does anyone have statistics to > compare a standalone mysql setup to a small gfs cluster using a san? > > > With best regards, > Sander van Beek > > --------------------------------------- > > Ing. S. van Beek > Elexis > Marketing 9 > 6921 RE Duiven > The Netherlands > > Tel: +31 (0)26 7110329 > Mob: +31 (0)6 28395109 > Fax: +31 (0)318 611112 > Email: <a href="mailto:sander@elexis.nl"> sander@elexis.nl</a> > Web: <a href="http://www.elexis.nl">http://www.elexis.nl</a> > > -- > Linux-cluster mailing list > <a href="mailto:Linux-cluster@redhat.com">Linux-cluster@redhat.com </a> > <a href="https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster">https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster</a> >