Hi 

i've also tested 4k performance and found similar results with fio and iozone 
tests as well as simple dd. I've noticed that my io rate doesn't go above 2k-3k 
in the virtual machines. I've got two servers with ssd journals but spindles 
for the osd. I've previusly tried to use nfs + zfs on the same hardware with 
the same drives acting as cache drives. The nfs performance was far better for 
4k io. I was hitting around 60k when the storage servers were reading the test 
file from ram. 

It looks like some more optimisations have to be done to fix the current 
bottleneck. 

Having said this, the read performance from multiple clients would excel NFS by 
far. In nfs I would not see the total speeds over 450-500 but with ceph i was 
going over 1GB/s 

Andrei 
----- Original Message -----

From: "Sergey Pimkov" <sergey.pim...@gmail.com> 
To: ceph-users@lists.ceph.com 
Sent: Thursday, 10 October, 2013 8:47:32 PM 
Subject: [ceph-users] SSD pool write performance 

Hello! 

I'm testing small CEPH pool consists of some SSD drives (without any 
spinners). Ceph version is 0.67.4. Seems like write performance of this 
configuration is not so good as possible, when I testing it with small 
block size (4k). 

Pool configuration: 
2 mons on separated hosts, one host with two OSD. First partition of 
each disk is used for journal and has 20Gb size, second is formatted as 
XFS and used for data (mount options: 
rw,noexec,nodev,noatime,nodiratime,inode64). 20% of space left 
unformatted. Journal aio and dio turned on. 

Each disk has about 15k IOPS with 4k blocks, iodepth 1 and 50k IOPS with 
4k block, iodepth 16 (tested with fio). Linear throughput of disks is 
about 420Mb/s. Network throughput is 1Gbit/s. 

I use rbd pool with size 1 and want this pool to act like RAID0 at this 
time. 

Virtual machine (QEMU/KVM) on separated host is configured to use 100Gb 
RBD as second disk. Fio running in this machine (iodepth 16, buffered=0, 
direct=1, libaio, 4k randwrite) shows about 2.5-3k IOPS. 
Multiple quests with the same configuration shows similar summary 
result. Local kernel RBD on host with OSD also shows about 2-2.5k IOPS. 
Latency is about 7ms. I also tried to pre-fill RBD without any results. 

Atop shows about 90% disks utilization during tests. CPU utilization is 
about 400% (2x Xeon E5504 is installed on ceph node). There is a lot of 
free memory on host. Blktrace shows that about 4k operations (4k to 
about 40k bytes) completing every second on every disk. OSD throughput 
is about 30 MB/s. 

I expected to see about 2 x 50k/4 = 20-30k IOPS on RBD, so is that too 
optimistic for CEPH with such load or if I missed up something important? 
I also tried to use one disk as journal (20GB, last space left 
unformatted) and configure the next disk as OSD, this configuration have 
shown almost the same result. 

Playing with some osd/filestore/journal options with admin socket ended 
with no result. 

Please, tell me am I wrong with this setup? Or should I use more disks 
to get better performance with small concurrent writes? Or is ceph 
optimized for work with slow spinners and shouldn't be used with SSD 
disk only? 
Thank you very much in advance! 

My ceph configuration: 
ceph.conf 
========================================================================== 
[global] 

auth cluster required = none 
auth service required = none 
auth client required = none 

[client] 

rbd cache = true 
rbd cache max dirty = 0 

[osd] 

osd journal aio = true 
osd max backfills = 4 
osd recovery max active = 1 
filestore max sync interval = 5 

[mon.1] 

host = ceph1 
mon addr = 10.10.0.1:6789 

[mon.2] 

host = ceph2 
mon addr = 10.10.0.2:6789 

[osd.72] 
host = ceph7 
devs = /dev/sdd2 
osd journal = /dev/sdd1 

[osd.73] 
host = ceph7 
devs = /dev/sde2 
osd journal = /dev/sde1 

_______________________________________________ 
ceph-users mailing list 
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com 
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com 

_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com

Reply via email to