On 16.06.2010 11:49, Wido den Hollander wrote:
Hi,
You were running all the Ceph components on the same host? E.g, mon, mds
and osd on the same machine?
yes, all on one.
Imho that is not the way to test Ceph.
of course this is not the inteded use uf ceph. i wanted to know the
performance penalty between local access and access with ceph. didn't
expect it to be that large (it's also huge with samba - so not a ceph
specific "problem").
i'll do more testing in the next weeks in a more ceph-apropriate
envirnoment. maybe also comparing to glusterfs.
I've done some benchmarking myself with 6 physical machines for OSD's
(different hw in each machine) and i was seeing about 30 ~ 40MB/sec over
a Gigabit network.
what was the workload involved with your benchmarking? if these are
large writes or reads then 30-40mb/s are IMHO not what i would expect of
6xGigE (6x80MB/s). I would expect the GigE port of the client to be the
bottleneck.
Try benchmarking Ceph against NFS and you will start seeing different
results.
thats why i've included samba in the mix. i wanted nfs but it crashed
the machine (heard about nfs problems in 2.6.32). samba wins all the
"competitions" in samba vs. ceph.
- Thomas
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
