Thanks for the reply Philippe,we were using these disks in our NAS,now
it looks like i am in big trouble :-(

On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 5:02 PM, Philippe Schwarz <p...@schwarz-fr.net> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Le 28/02/2015 12:19, mad Engineer a écrit :
>> Hello All,
>>
>> I am trying ceph-firefly 0.80.8
>> (69eaad7f8308f21573c604f121956e64679a52a7) with 9 OSD ,all Samsung
>> SSD 850 EVO on 3 servers with 24 G RAM,16 cores @2.27 Ghz Ubuntu
>> 14.04 LTS with 3.16-3 kernel.All are connected to 10G ports with
>> maximum MTU.There are no extra disks for journaling and also there
>> are no separate network for replication and data transfer.All 3
>> nodes are also hosting monitoring process.Operating system runs on
>> SATA disk.
>>
>> When doing a sequential benchmark using "dd" on RBD, mounted on
>> client as ext4 its taking 110s to write 100Mb data at an average
>> speed of 926Kbps.
>>
>> time dd if=/dev/zero of=hello bs=4k count=25000 oflag=direct
>> 25000+0 records in 25000+0 records out 102400000 bytes (102 MB)
>> copied, 110.582 s, 926 kB/s
>>
>> real    1m50.585s user    0m0.106s sys     0m2.233s
>>
>> While doing this directly on ssd mount point shows:
>>
>> time dd if=/dev/zero of=hello bs=4k count=25000 oflag=direct
>> 25000+0 records in 25000+0 records out 102400000 bytes (102 MB)
>> copied, 1.38567 s, 73.9 MB/s
>>
>> OSDs are in XFS with these extra arguments :
>>
>> rw,noatime,inode64,logbsize=256k,delaylog,allocsize=4M
>>
>> ceph.conf
>>
>> [global] fsid = 7d889081-7826-439c-9fe5-d4e57480d9be
>> mon_initial_members = ceph1, ceph2, ceph3 mon_host =
>> 10.99.10.118,10.99.10.119,10.99.10.120 auth_cluster_required =
>> cephx auth_service_required = cephx auth_client_required = cephx
>> filestore_xattr_use_omap = true osd_pool_default_size = 2
>> osd_pool_default_min_size = 2 osd_pool_default_pg_num = 450
>> osd_pool_default_pgp_num = 450 max_open_files = 131072
>>
>> [osd] osd_mkfs_type = xfs osd_op_threads = 8 osd_disk_threads = 4
>> osd_mount_options_xfs =
>> "rw,noatime,inode64,logbsize=256k,delaylog,allocsize=4M"
>>
>>
>> on our traditional storage with Full SAS disk, same "dd" completes
>> in 16s with an average write speed of 6Mbps.
>>
>> Rados bench:
>>
>> rados bench -p rbd 10 write Maintaining 16 concurrent writes of
>> 4194304 bytes for up to 10 seconds or 0 objects Object prefix:
>> benchmark_data_ceph1_2977 sec Cur ops   started  finished  avg MB/s
>> cur MB/s  last lat   avg lat 0       0         0         0
>> 0         0         -         0 1      16        94        78
>> 311.821       312  0.041228  0.140132 2      16       192       176
>> 351.866       392  0.106294  0.175055 3      16       275       259
>> 345.216       332  0.076795  0.166036 4      16       302       286
>> 285.912       108  0.043888  0.196419 5      16       395       379
>> 303.11       372  0.126033  0.207488 6      16       501       485
>> 323.242       424  0.125972  0.194559 7      16       621       605
>> 345.621       480  0.194155  0.183123 8      16       730       714
>> 356.903       436  0.086678  0.176099 9      16       814       798
>> 354.572       336  0.081567  0.174786 10      16       832
>> 816   326.313        72  0.037431  0.182355 11      16       833
>> 817   297.013         4  0.533326  0.182784 Total time run:
>> 11.489068 Total writes made:      833 Write size:
>> 4194304 Bandwidth (MB/sec):     290.015
>>
>> Stddev Bandwidth:       175.723 Max bandwidth (MB/sec): 480 Min
>> bandwidth (MB/sec): 0 Average Latency:        0.220582 Stddev
>> Latency:         0.343697 Max latency:            2.85104 Min
>> latency:            0.035381
>>
>> Our ultimate aim is to replace existing SAN with ceph,but for that
>> it should meet minimum 8000 iops.Can any one help me with this,OSD
>> are SSD,CPU has good clock speed,backend network is good but still
>> we are not able to extract full capability of SSD disks.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>
> Hi, i'm new to ceph so, don't consider my words as holy truth.
>
> It seems that Samsung 840 (so i assume 850) are crappy for ceph :
>
> MTBF :
> http://lists.ceph.com/pipermail/ceph-users-ceph.com/2014-November/044258.html
> Bandwidth
> :http://lists.ceph.com/pipermail/ceph-users-ceph.com/2014-December/045247.html
>
> And according to a confirmed user of Ceph/ProxmoX, Samsung SSDs should
> be avoided if possible in ceph storage.
>
> Apart from that, it seems there was an limitation in ceph for the use
> of the complete bandwidth available in SSDs; but i think with less
> than 1Mb/s you haven't hit this limit.
>
> I remind you that i'm not a ceph-guru (far from that, indeed), so feel
> free to disagree; i'm on the way to improve my knowledge.
>
> Best regards.
>
>
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAlTxp0UACgkQlhqCFkbqHRb5+wCgrXCM3VsnVE6PCbbpOmQXCXbr
> 8u0An2BUgZWismSK0PxbwVDOD5+/UWik
> =0o0v
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com

Reply via email to