[Linux-cluster] gfs2 performance
maurizio.rottin at gmail.com
Mon Jul 21 07:38:41 UTC 2008
> 2008/7/14 Ozgur Akan <ozgurakan at gmail.com>:
> Unfortunately, we formatted 8TB volume with EXT3 and finally put it into
> I am really disappointed with GFS2 performance, it is not fast enough for
> large file systems with many files. On the other hand we still use GFS for a
> 350gb partition with low IO. GFS has many good promises but only for some
> specific environments with probably low IO, small number of files etc..
> I think it can never be as fast as EXT3 because if its design and targets
> but something close would make us more than happy.
i am not!
I did a lot of benckmarking with bonnie++ on a 450 GB filesystem.
i was testing ext3, gfs2, and gfs
ext3 is obviously the fastest, but i nees a clustered file system, so
it was only teken as a "best measure".
Then i tried gfs2 and gfs, with one, two and three server writing with
bonnie++ at the same time.
The result showed gfs2 better than gfs in almost every bonnie++ test,
and it was close enought to ext3 to use it.
But always think that is a clustered filesystem!
Then now i wait for your result on a bigger 8TB fs.
More information about the Linux-cluster