11:48 a.m.
I've been considering hyperconverged oVirt setup VS san/nas but I wonder
how the meltdown patches have affected glusterFS performance since it is
CPU intensive. Has anyone who has applied recent kernel updates noticed a
performance drop with glusterFS?
12:39 p.m.
Does it matter? This is just one of those required things. IMHO, most
companies know there will be impact, and I would think they would accept
any informational measurement after the fact.
There are probably only a few cases where timing is so limited to where
a skew would matter.
Just saying...
On 01/26/2018 11:48 AM, Jayme wrote:
I've been considering hyperconverged oVirt setup VS san/nas but I
wonder
how the meltdown patches have affected glusterFS performance since it is
CPU intensive. Has anyone who has applied recent kernel updates noticed
a performance drop with glusterFS?
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
12:51 p.m.
I believe about 50% overhead or even more...
Am 26.01.2018 7:40 nachm. schrieb "Christopher Cox"
<ccox(a)endlessnow.com>:
Does it matter? This is just one of those required things. IMHO,
most
companies know there will be impact, and I would think they would accept
any informational measurement after the fact.
There are probably only a few cases where timing is so limited to where a
skew would matter.
Just saying...
On 01/26/2018 11:48 AM, Jayme wrote:
> I've been considering hyperconverged oVirt setup VS san/nas but I wonder
> how the meltdown patches have affected glusterFS performance since it is
> CPU intensive. Has anyone who has applied recent kernel updates noticed a
> performance drop with glusterFS?
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users(a)ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
> _______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
5:42 a.m.
On Jan 26, 2018 7:52 PM, "Arman Khalatyan" <arm2arm(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I believe about 50% overhead or even more...
Where are you getting these numbers from?
We've seen much lower numbers.
It is processor dependent, so newer are less affected as older CPUs.
Also, keep in mimd that additional patches are expected that will bring
back some of the performance.
Y.
Am 26.01.2018 7:40 nachm. schrieb "Christopher Cox"
<ccox(a)endlessnow.com>:
Does it matter? This is just one of those required things. IMHO,
most
companies know there will be impact, and I would think they would accept
any informational measurement after the fact.
There are probably only a few cases where timing is so limited to where a
skew would matter.
Just saying...
On 01/26/2018 11:48 AM, Jayme wrote:
> I've been considering hyperconverged oVirt setup VS san/nas but I wonder
> how the meltdown patches have affected glusterFS performance since it is
> CPU intensive. Has anyone who has applied recent kernel updates noticed a
> performance drop with glusterFS?
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users(a)ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
> _______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
2449
days inactive
2450
days old
3 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Arman Khalatyan -
Christopher Cox -
Jayme -
Yaniv Kaul