Hello,
I've been chasing a proof of concept for Lustre, so far performance
tests are not promising.
Basic setup:
MGS/MDT: VM, 4 cpu, 8GB ram
OSS #1: VM, 16 cpu, 8GB ram
OSS #1: hardware, 20 cpu, 1TB ram
I've been using sybench fileio for tests, 16k on 50GB over 5 minutes.
Basic test results, performed on OSS with mounted FS:
Base ext4 SSD, OSS #2:
Sequential write: 1 GB/s
Random r/w: 551 MB/s read, 367 MB/s write
ZFS dataset SSD, OSS #2:
Sequential write: 397 MB/s
Randow r/w: 109 MB/s read, 73 MB/s write
About 5 times slower. Expected?
ZFS OST SSD, OSS #2:
Sequential write: 9 MB/s
Randow r/w: 18MB/s read, 12.5MB/s write
Over 30-110 times slower than basic disk, that just doesn't seem right.
I also tried ldiskfs, not much difference.
I tried various changes, ZFS compression on, atime off, xattr sa.
Watching the system via atop during a 5 minute OST test, disks are not
100% busy and CPU is mostly idle. Network is all lo.
What am I missing? I assumed random r/w would be pretty slow, but not
sequential.
Thanks,
--
Bill Carlson
Anything is possible, given Time and Money.
_______________________________________________
lustre-discuss mailing list
lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org
