On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 12:01 PM, Ivan Kolodyazhny <e...@e0ne.info> wrote:
> + [sahara] because they are primary consumer of the BDD. > > John, > Thanks for the answer. My comments are inline. > > Regards, > Ivan Kolodyazhny, > http://blog.e0ne.info/ > > On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 4:41 PM, John Griffith <john.griffi...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 4:43 AM, Ivan Kolodyazhny <e...@e0ne.info> wrote: >> >>> Hi team, >>> >>> We did some performance tests [1] for LVM and BDD drivers. All tests >>> were executed on real hardware with OpenStack Mitaka release. >>> Unfortunately, we didn't have enough time to execute all tests and compare >>> results. We used Sahara/Hadoop cluster with TestDFSIO and others tests. >>> >>> All tests were executed on the same hardware and OpenStack release. Only >>> difference were in cinder.conf to enable needed backend and/or target >>> driver. >>> >>> Tests were executed on following configurations: >>> >>> - LVM +TGT target >>> - LVM+LocalTarget: PoC based on [2] spec >>> - LVM+LIO >>> - Block Device Driver. >>> >>> >>> Feel free to ask question if any about our testing infrastructure, >>> environment, etc. >>> >>> >>> [1] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qS_ClylqdbtbrVSvwbbD >>> pdWNf2lZPR_ndtW6n54GJX0/edit?usp=sharing >>> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/247880/ >>> >>> Regards, >>> Ivan Kolodyazhny, >>> http://blog.e0ne.info/ >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> ______________ >>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >>> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.op >>> enstack.org?subject:unsubscribe >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >>> >>> Thanks Ivan, so I'd like to propose we (the Cinder team) discuss a few >> things (again): >> >> 1. Deprecate the BDD driver >> Based on the data here LVM+LIO the delta in performance (with the >> exception of the Terravalidate run against 3TB) doesn't seem significant >> enough to warrant maintaining an additional driver that has only a subset >> of features implemented. It would be good to understand why that >> particular test has such a significant peformance gap. >> > What about Local Target? Does it make sense to implement it instead BDD? > Maybe I'm missing something, what would the advantage be? LVM+LIO and LVM+LOCAL-TARGET seem pretty close. In the interest of simplicity and maintenance just thinking maybe it would be worth considering just using LVM+LIO across the board. > >> 2. Consider getting buy off to move the default implementation to use the >> LIO driver and consider deprecating the TGT driver >> > +1. Let's bring this topic for the next weekly meeting. > > > >> >> I realize this probably isn't a sufficient enough data set to make those >> two decisions but I think it's at least enough to have a more informed >> discussion this time. >> >> Thanks, >> John >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> ______________ >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscrib >> e >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> >> > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
