On 29/08/14 04:11, Sebastien Han wrote:
Hey all,

See my fio template:

[global]
#logging
#write_iops_log=write_iops_log
#write_bw_log=write_bw_log
#write_lat_log=write_lat_lo

time_based
runtime=60

ioengine=rbd
clientname=admin
pool=test
rbdname=fio
invalidate=0    # mandatory
#rw=randwrite
rw=write
bs=4k
#bs=32m
size=5G
group_reporting

[rbd_iodepth32]
iodepth=32
direct=1

See my rio output:

rbd_iodepth32: (g=0): rw=write, bs=4K-4K/4K-4K/4K-4K, ioengine=rbd, iodepth=32
fio-2.1.11-14-gb74e
Starting 1 process
rbd engine: RBD version: 0.1.8
Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W(1)] [100.0% done] [0KB/12876KB/0KB /s] [0/3219/0 iops] [eta 
00m:00s]
rbd_iodepth32: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=32116: Thu Aug 28 00:28:26 2014
   write: io=771448KB, bw=12855KB/s, iops=3213, runt= 60010msec
     slat (usec): min=42, max=1578, avg=66.50, stdev=16.96
     clat (msec): min=1, max=28, avg= 9.85, stdev= 1.48
      lat (msec): min=1, max=28, avg= 9.92, stdev= 1.47
     clat percentiles (usec):
      |  1.00th=[ 6368],  5.00th=[ 8256], 10.00th=[ 8640], 20.00th=[ 9152],
      | 30.00th=[ 9408], 40.00th=[ 9664], 50.00th=[ 9792], 60.00th=[10048],
      | 70.00th=[10176], 80.00th=[10560], 90.00th=[10944], 95.00th=[11456],
      | 99.00th=[13120], 99.50th=[16768], 99.90th=[25984], 99.95th=[27008],
      | 99.99th=[28032]
     bw (KB  /s): min=11864, max=13808, per=100.00%, avg=12864.36, stdev=407.35
     lat (msec) : 2=0.03%, 4=0.54%, 10=59.79%, 20=39.24%, 50=0.41%
   cpu          : usr=19.15%, sys=4.69%, ctx=326309, majf=0, minf=426088
   IO depths    : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=33.9%, 32=66.1%, >=64=0.0%
      submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
      complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=99.6%, 8=0.4%, 16=0.1%, 32=0.1%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
      issued    : total=r=0/w=192862/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0
      latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=32


Hi Sebastien,

Looking at your fio template - were you running with rw=write or rw=randwrite? If the latter, mounting (xfs) with nobarrier seems to get much better results [1]. The run below is for a single osd on an xfs partition from an Intel 520. I'm using another 520 as a journal:

rbd_thread: (g=0): rw=randwrite, bs=4K-4K/4K-4K/4K-4K, ioengine=rbd, iodepth=64
fio-2.1.11-20-g9a44
Starting 1 process
rbd engine: RBD version: 0.1.8
Jobs: 1 (f=1): [w(1)] [100.0% done] [0KB/23480KB/0KB /s] [0/5870/0 iops] [eta 00m:00s]
rbd_thread: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=2820: Fri Aug 29 13:59:13 2014
  write: io=1024.0MB, bw=27540KB/s, iops=6885, runt= 38074msec
    slat (usec): min=16, max=4323, avg=52.28, stdev=65.23
    clat (usec): min=565, max=63714, avg=9014.80, stdev=3814.57
     lat (usec): min=949, max=63774, avg=9067.07, stdev=3811.52
    clat percentiles (usec):
     |  1.00th=[ 3312],  5.00th=[ 4448], 10.00th=[ 5216], 20.00th=[ 6240],
     | 30.00th=[ 7072], 40.00th=[ 7776], 50.00th=[ 8512], 60.00th=[ 9280],
     | 70.00th=[10176], 80.00th=[11328], 90.00th=[13120], 95.00th=[14912],
     | 99.00th=[19328], 99.50th=[21888], 99.90th=[48384], 99.95th=[51968],
     | 99.99th=[56064]
bw (KB /s): min=20128, max=30400, per=100.00%, avg=27564.95, stdev=1448.85
    lat (usec) : 750=0.01%, 1000=0.01%
    lat (msec) : 2=0.02%, 4=2.97%, 10=65.43%, 20=30.77%, 50=0.73%
    lat (msec) : 100=0.08%
  cpu          : usr=29.17%, sys=3.49%, ctx=208270, majf=0, minf=16761
IO depths : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.5%, 32=72.2%, >=64=27.2% submit : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% complete : 0=0.0%, 4=94.9%, 8=3.3%, 16=1.3%, 32=0.4%, 64=0.1%, >=64=0.0%
     issued    : total=r=0/w=262144/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0
     latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=64



Regards

Mark

[1] I'm thinking it should be safe to disable barriers as ceph seems to do fsync and friends when it needs stuff to persist...however would be good to confirm this - guys?
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com

Reply via email to