Am 08.11.2012 um 06:54 schrieb Dietmar Maurer :
>> Why is vhost net driver involved here at all? Kvm guest only uses ssh here.
>
> I though you are testing things (rdb) which depends on KVM network speed?
Kvm process uses librbd and both are running on host not in guest.
Stefan
>
> --
> To
Am 08.11.2012 um 06:49 schrieb Dietmar Maurer :
>>> I've noticed something really interesting.
>>>
>>> I get 5000 iops / VM for rand. 4k writes while assigning 4 cores on a
>>> 2.5 Ghz Xeon.
>>>
>>> When i move this VM to another kvm host with 3.6Ghz i get 8000 iops
>>> (still 8
>>> cores) when
> Why is vhost net driver involved here at all? Kvm guest only uses ssh here.
I though you are testing things (rdb) which depends on KVM network speed?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo inf
Am 08.11.2012 um 06:42 schrieb Dietmar Maurer :
>> I've noticed something really interesting.
>>
>> I get 5000 iops / VM for rand. 4k writes while assigning 4 cores on a
>> 2.5 Ghz Xeon.
>>
>> When i move this VM to another kvm host with 3.6Ghz i get 8000 iops (still 8
>> cores) when i then LOWE
> > I've noticed something really interesting.
> >
> > I get 5000 iops / VM for rand. 4k writes while assigning 4 cores on a
> > 2.5 Ghz Xeon.
> >
> > When i move this VM to another kvm host with 3.6Ghz i get 8000 iops
> > (still 8
> > cores) when i then LOWER the assigned cores from 8 to 4 i get
>
> I've noticed something really interesting.
>
> I get 5000 iops / VM for rand. 4k writes while assigning 4 cores on a
> 2.5 Ghz Xeon.
>
> When i move this VM to another kvm host with 3.6Ghz i get 8000 iops (still 8
> cores) when i then LOWER the assigned cores from 8 to 4 i get
> 14.500 iops. If
On 11/07/2012 08:26 AM, Stefan Priebe wrote:
Am 07.11.2012 16:04, schrieb Mark Nelson:
Whew, glad you found the problem Stefan! I was starting to wonder what
was going on. :) Do you mind filling a bug about the control
dependencies?
Sure where should i fill it in?
http://www.tracker.newdre
On 11/07/2012 05:34 AM, hemant surale wrote:
I am not sure about my judgments but please help me out understanding
the result of following experiment carried out : -
Experiment : (3 node cluster, all have ceph v.0.48.2agonaut( after
building ceph from src code) + UBUNTU 12.04 + kernel 3.2.0 )
On 11/07/2012 06:00 PM, Joao Eduardo Luis wrote:
On 11/07/2012 10:02 PM, Stefan Priebe wrote:
Hello again,
I've noticed something really interesting.
I get 5000 iops / VM for rand. 4k writes while assigning 4 cores on a
2.5 Ghz Xeon.
When i move this VM to another kvm host with 3.6Ghz i get 8
On 11/07/2012 06:00 PM, Joao Eduardo Luis wrote:
On 11/07/2012 10:02 PM, Stefan Priebe wrote:
Hello again,
I've noticed something really interesting.
I get 5000 iops / VM for rand. 4k writes while assigning 4 cores on a
2.5 Ghz Xeon.
When i move this VM to another kvm host with 3.6Ghz i get 8
Hi All,
I've been looking for this bit of code for awhile how to make open stack create
a VM with the dashboard with a attached/imaged volume to avoid the current
multistep process of creating a vm with ceph volume.
Here's the code, thanks goes out to vishy on openstack-dev's and I've added a
On 11/07/2012 10:02 PM, Stefan Priebe wrote:
> Hello again,
>
> I've noticed something really interesting.
>
> I get 5000 iops / VM for rand. 4k writes while assigning 4 cores on a
> 2.5 Ghz Xeon.
>
> When i move this VM to another kvm host with 3.6Ghz i get 8000 iops
> (still 8 cores) when i th
On 11/07/2012 04:51 PM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote:
2012/11/7 Martin Mailand :
But it looks good on paper, so it's definitely a try worth.
is at least 4x times faster than 10gbe and AFAIK should have a lower latency.
I'm planning to use infiniband as backend storage network, used for
OSD repl
good question, probably we do not have enough experience with IPoIB.
But it looks good on paper, so it's definitely a try worth.
-martin
Am 07.11.2012 23:28, schrieb Gandalf Corvotempesta:
2012/11/7 Martin Mailand :
I tested a Arista 7150S-24, a HP5900 and in a few weeks I will get a
Mellanox
Hi,
I *think* the HP is Broadcom based, the Arista is Fulcrum based, and I
don't know which chips Mellanox is using.
Our NOC tested both of them, an the Arista was the clear winner, at
least in our workload.
-martin
Am 07.11.2012 22:59, schrieb Stefan Priebe:
HP told me they all use the s
Hello again,
I've noticed something really interesting.
I get 5000 iops / VM for rand. 4k writes while assigning 4 cores on a
2.5 Ghz Xeon.
When i move this VM to another kvm host with 3.6Ghz i get 8000 iops
(still 8 cores) when i then LOWER the assigned cores from 8 to 4 i get
14.500 iops.
Am 07.11.2012 22:55, schrieb Martin Mailand:
Hi Stefan,
deep buffers means latency spikes, you should go for fast switching
latency. The HP5900 has a latency of 1ms, the Arista and Mellanox of 250ns.
HP told me they all use the same ships and Arista measures latency while
only one port is in
Hi Stefan,
deep buffers means latency spikes, you should go for fast switching
latency. The HP5900 has a latency of 1ms, the Arista and Mellanox of 250ns.
And I you should think at the price the HP5900 cost 3 times of the Mellanox.
-martin
Am 07.11.2012 22:44, schrieb Stefan Priebe:
Am 07.11
Am 07.11.2012 22:35, schrieb Martin Mailand:
Hi,
I tested a Arista 7150S-24, a HP5900 and in a few weeks I will get a
Mellanox MSX1016. ATM the Arista is may favourite.
For the dual 10GeB NICs I tested the Intel X520-DA2 and the Mellanox
ConnectX-3. My favourite is the Intel X520-DA2.
That's p
Hi,
I tested a Arista 7150S-24, a HP5900 and in a few weeks I will get a
Mellanox MSX1016. ATM the Arista is may favourite.
For the dual 10GeB NICs I tested the Intel X520-DA2 and the Mellanox
ConnectX-3. My favourite is the Intel X520-DA2.
-martin
Am 07.11.2012 22:14, schrieb Gandalf Corvot
Hi,
I have 16 SAS disk on a LSI 9266-8i and 4 Intel 520 SSD on a HBA, the
node has dual 10G Ethernet. The clients are 4 nodes with dual 10GeB, as
test I use rados bench on each client. The aggregated write speed is
around 1,6GB/s with single replication.
In the first configuration, I had the
Hello list,
whiling benchmarking i was wondering, why the ceph-osd load is so
extreme high while having random 4k write i/o.
Here an example while benchmarking:
random 4k write: 16.000 iop/s 180% CPU Load in top from EACH ceph-osd
process
random 4k read: 16.000 iop/s 19% CPU Load in top fr
On Wed, 7 Nov 2012, Stefan Priebe wrote:
> Hello list,
>
> i've done some benchmarks regarding striping / v1 / v2.
>
> Results:
> format 1:
>
> write: io=5739MB, bw=65278KB/s, iops=16319, runt= 90029msec
> read : io=5771MB, bw=65636KB/s, iops=16408, runt= 90030msec
> write: io=77224MB, bw=
Hello list,
i've done some benchmarks regarding striping / v1 / v2.
Results:
format 1:
write: io=5739MB, bw=65278KB/s, iops=16319, runt= 90029msec
read : io=5771MB, bw=65636KB/s, iops=16408, runt= 90030msec
write: io=77224MB, bw=874044KB/s, iops=213, runt= 90473msec
read : io=178840MB,
On 11/07/2012 12:14 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote:
2012/11/7 Dan Mick :
Resolution: installing the packages built for precise, rather than squeeze,
got versions that use syncfs.
Which packages, ceph or libc?
The ceph packages.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ce
On 11/07/2012 10:35 AM, Atchley, Scott wrote:
On Nov 7, 2012, at 11:20 AM, Mark Nelson wrote:
Right now I'm doing 3 journals per SSD, but topping out at about
1.2-1.4GB/s from the client perspective for the node with 15+ drives and
5 SSDs. It's possible newer versions of the code and tuning
On Nov 7, 2012, at 11:20 AM, Mark Nelson wrote:
>>> Right now I'm doing 3 journals per SSD, but topping out at about
>>> 1.2-1.4GB/s from the client perspective for the node with 15+ drives and
>>> 5 SSDs. It's possible newer versions of the code and tuning may
>>> increase that.
>>
>> What in
Am 07.11.2012 16:04, schrieb Mark Nelson:
Whew, glad you found the problem Stefan! I was starting to wonder what
was going on. :) Do you mind filling a bug about the control dependencies?
Sure where should i fill it in?
Stefan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph
On Nov 7, 2012, at 10:01 AM, Mark Nelson wrote:
> On 11/07/2012 06:28 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote:
>> 2012/11/7 Sage Weil :
>>> On Wed, 7 Nov 2012, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote:
I'm evaluating some SSD drives as journal.
Samsung 840 Pro seems to be the fastest in sequential reads and
On 11/07/2012 10:12 AM, Atchley, Scott wrote:
On Nov 7, 2012, at 10:01 AM, Mark Nelson wrote:
On 11/07/2012 06:28 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote:
2012/11/7 Sage Weil :
On Wed, 7 Nov 2012, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote:
I'm evaluating some SSD drives as journal.
Samsung 840 Pro seems to be th
Hello,
i've added two nodes with 4 devices each and modified the crushmap.
But importing the new map results in:
crushmap max_devices 55 > osdmap max_osd 35
What's wrong?
Greets
Stefan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majord..
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Gandalf Corvotempesta
wrote:
> 2012/11/7 Gregory Farnum :
>> The mons need to be reachable by everybody. They don't do a ton of
>> network traffic, but 100Mb/s might be pushing it a bit low...
>
> Some portion of my network are 10/100 with gigabit uplink.
> In this
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Gandalf Corvotempesta
wrote:
> Which kind of network should I plain for 3 or 4 MONs nodes?
> Are these node called by the ceph client (RBD, RGW, and so on) or only by OSD?
>
> Can I use some virtual machines distributed across multiple Xen nodes
> on a 100mbit/s net
Whew, glad you found the problem Stefan! I was starting to wonder what
was going on. :) Do you mind filling a bug about the control dependencies?
Mark
On 11/07/2012 07:31 AM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote:
Am 07.11.2012 10:41, schrieb Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG:
Hello list,
syncfs i
On 11/07/2012 06:28 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote:
2012/11/7 Sage Weil :
On Wed, 7 Nov 2012, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote:
I'm evaluating some SSD drives as journal.
Samsung 840 Pro seems to be the fastest in sequential reads and write.
The 840 Pro seems to reach 485MB/s in sequential write:
I have realize that requests from fastcgi in nginx from radosgw returning:
HTTP/1.1 200, not a HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Any other cgi that i run, for example php via fastcgi return this like
RFC says, with OK.
Is someone experience this problem ??
I see in code:
./src/rgw/rgw_rest.cc line 36
const sta
I am not sure about my judgments but please help me out understanding
the result of following experiment carried out : -
Experiment : (3 node cluster, all have ceph v.0.48.2agonaut( after
building ceph from src code) + UBUNTU 12.04 + kernel 3.2.0 )
--
Am 07.11.2012 10:41, schrieb Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG:
Hello list,
syncfs is much slower than without syncfs to me.
If i compile latest ceph master with wip-rbd-read:
with syncfs:
rand 4K:
write: io=1133MB, bw=12853KB/s, iops=3213, runt= 90277msec
read : io=1239MB, bw=14046KB/s, iops
On Wed, 7 Nov 2012, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote:
> I'm evaluating some SSD drives as journal.
> Samsung 840 Pro seems to be the fastest in sequential reads and write.
>
> What parameter should I consider for a journal? I think that none of
> read benchmark are influent because when dumping journal
Hello list,
syncfs is much slower than without syncfs to me.
If i compile latest ceph master with wip-rbd-read:
with syncfs:
rand 4K:
write: io=1133MB, bw=12853KB/s, iops=3213, runt= 90277msec
read : io=1239MB, bw=14046KB/s, iops=3511, runt= 90325msec
seq 4M:
write: io=37560MB, bw=423874K
On 07-11-12 09:17, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote:
2012/11/7 Wido den Hollander :
Except that SSDs will mainly fail due to the amount of write cycles they had
to endure.
So in RAID-1 your SSDs will fail at almost the same time.
With for example 8 OSDs in a server you better spread them out 50/5
41 matches
Mail list logo
