Hello,

We currently have a 12 node (3 monitor+9 OSD) ceph cluster, made up of 107 x 
4TB drives formatted with xfs. The cluster is running ceph version 0.80.7:

Cluster health:
cluster 504b5794-34bd-44e7-a8c3-0494cf800c23
     health HEALTH_WARN crush map has legacy tunables
     monmap e1: 3 mons at 
{hqceph1=10.35.1.201:6789/0,hqceph2=10.35.1.203:6789/0,hqceph3=10.35.1.205:6789/0},
 election epoch 156, quorum 0,1,2 hqceph1,hqceph2,hqceph3
     osdmap e19568: 107 osds: 107 up, 107 in
      pgmap v10117422: 2952 pgs, 15 pools, 77202 GB data, 19532 kobjects
            226 TB used, 161 TB / 388 TB avail

Relevant ceph.conf entries:
osd_journal_size = 10240
filestore_xattr_use_omap = true
osd_mount_options_xfs = "rw,noatime,nodiratime,logbsize=256k,logbufs=8,inode64"
osd_mkfs_options_xfs = "-f -i size=2048"


A while back I created an 80 TB rbd image to be used as an archive repository 
for some of our audio and video files. We are still seeing good rados and rbd 
read and write throughput performance, however we seem to be having quite a 
long delay in response times when we try to list out the files in directories 
with a large number of folders, files, etc.

Subsequent directory listing times seem to run a lot faster (but I am not sure 
for long that is the case before we see another instance of slowness), however 
the initial directory listings can take 20 to 45 seconds.

The rbd kernel client is running on ubuntu 14.04 using kernel version 
'3.18.0-031800-generic'.

Benchmarks:

root@rbdmount1:/mnt/rbd/music_library/D#time ls (file names removed):
real    0m18.045s
user    0m0.000s
sys    0m0.011s

root@rbdmount1:/mnt/rbd# dd bs=1M count=1024 if=/dev/zero of=test conv=fdatasync
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 9.94287 s, 108 MB/s


My questions are:

1) Is there anything inherent in our setup/configuration that would prevent us 
from having fast directory listings on these larger directories (using an rbd 
image of that size for example)?

2) Have there been any changes made in Giant that would warrant upgrading the 
cluster a a fix to resolve this issue?

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,

Shain


Shain Miley | Manager of Systems and Infrastructure, Digital Media | 
smi...@npr.org | 202.513.3649
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com

Reply via email to