[Linux-cluster] GFS on 2.6.8.1 more simple performance numbers
Wim Coekaerts
wim.coekaerts at oracle.com
Sat Oct 16 04:07:46 UTC 2004
can someone tell me what the focus of this list is, for sure ?
eg, is this gfs only ? or clustering for 2.6 kernel in general eg we can
also bring up ocfs2 or should I shut up on the ocfs2 side ?
On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 05:15:05PM -0700, Daniel McNeil wrote:
> I had more time to test GFS. Reminder of the setup
> (note: I added more memory so the machines are up to 1GB).
> 3 machines each:
> 2 processor (800 MHZ Pentium 3)
> 1GB of memory
> 2 100Mb ethernet (1 public, 1 private)
> 1 2-port Qlogic FC host adapter
> 2 F/C sitches cascaded together
> 1 - 10 disk - dual controller FASTT200 (36GB 10,000rpm drives)
>
> The command run was 'time tar xf /Views/linux-2.6.8.1.tar;
> time sync' where /Views is an NFS mounted file system and
> the current working directory is in a clean file system on
> a 5-disk stripe 64k stripe width). For the 2 node case,
> I ran the command in separate directories on each node.
> For comparison, the ext3 file system in on a single scsi
> disk in data=ordered.
>
>
> Tar
> --- real user sys
> ext3 tar 0m6.535s 0m0.429s 0m4.010s
> ext3 sync 0m21.953s 0m0.000s 0m0.574s
>
> gfs 1 node tar 1m15.286s 0m0.787s 0m17.085s
> gfs 1 node sync 0m7.734s 0m0.000s 0m0.190s
>
> gfs 2 node tar 3m58.337s 0m0.844s 0m17.082s
> gfs 2 node sync 0m3.119s 0m0.000s 0m0.117s
> gfs 2 node tar 3m55.147s 0m0.911s 0m17.529s
> gfs 2 node sync 0m1.862s 0m0.001s 0m0.043s
>
>
> du -s linux-2.6.8.1 (after 1st mount)
> ----- real user sys
> ext3 0m5.361s 0m0.039s 0m0.318s
> gfs 1 node 0m46.077s 0m0.097s 0m5.144s
> gfs 2 node 0m40.835s 0m0.069s 0m3.218s
> gfs 2 node 0m41.313s 0m0.089s 0m3.348s
>
> Doing a 2nd du -s should be cached. On ext3 is always
> seems to be. On gfs the numbers vary quite a bit.
>
> 2nd du -s
> ---------
> ext3 0m0.130s 0m0.028s 0m0.101s
> gfs 1 node 0m20.95s 0m0.075s 0m3.102s
> gfs 1 node 0m0.453s 0m0.044s 0m0.408s
> gfs 2 node 0m0.446s 0m0.046s 0m0.400s
> gfs 2 node 0m0.456s 0m0.028s 0m0.428s
>
> rm -rf linux-2.6.8.1
> --------------------
> ext3 0m5.050s 0m0.019s 0m0.822s
> gfs 1 node 0m28.583s 0m0.094s 0m8.354s
> gfs 2 node 7m16.295s 0m0.073s 0m7.785s
> gfs 2 node 8m30.809s 0m0.086s 0m7.759s
>
>
> Comment/questions:
>
> Tar on gfs on 1 node is nearly 3x slower than ext3.
> Tar on 2 gfs nodes in parallel is showing reverse scaling:
> 2 nodes take 4 minutes.
>
> Is there some reason why sync is so fast on gfs?
> ext3 shows fast tar then long sync, gfs show long
> tar and fairly fast sync.
>
> 1 time du is around 8 times slow than ext3. This must the
> time in instantiate and acquire the DLM locks for the
> inodes.
>
> Do you know the expected time to get instantiate and acquire a
> DLM lock?
>
> rm is 6 times slower on gfs than ext3. Reverse scaling
> on removes happening on 2 nodes in parallel. These are
> in separate directories, so one would not expect DLM
> conflicts.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Daniel
>
> --
> Linux-cluster mailing list
> Linux-cluster at redhat.com
> http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
More information about the Linux-cluster
mailing list