On 11/09/2020 17:44, Mark Nelson wrote:
On 9/11/20 4:15 AM, George Shuklin wrote:
On 10/09/2020 19:37, Mark Nelson wrote:
On 9/10/20 11:03 AM, George Shuklin wrote:
...
Are there any knobs to tweak to see higher performance for
ceph-osd? I'm pretty sure it's not any kind of leveling, GC or
On 9/11/20 4:15 AM, George Shuklin wrote:
On 10/09/2020 19:37, Mark Nelson wrote:
On 9/10/20 11:03 AM, George Shuklin wrote:
...
Are there any knobs to tweak to see higher performance for ceph-osd?
I'm pretty sure it's not any kind of leveling, GC or other
'iops-related' issues (brd has
On 10/09/2020 19:37, Mark Nelson wrote:
On 9/10/20 11:03 AM, George Shuklin wrote:
...
Are there any knobs to tweak to see higher performance for ceph-osd?
I'm pretty sure it's not any kind of leveling, GC or other
'iops-related' issues (brd has performance of two order of magnitude
On 10/09/2020 22:35, vita...@yourcmc.ru wrote:
Hi George
Author of Ceph_performance here! :)
I suspect you're running tests with 1 PG. Every PG's requests are always
serialized, that's why OSD doesn't utilize all threads with 1 PG. You need
something like 8 PGs per OSD. More than 8 usually
Latency from a client side is not an issue. It just combines with other
latencies in the stack. The more client lags, the easier it's for the
cluster.
Here, the thing I talk, is slightly different. When you want to establish
baseline performance for osd daemon (disregarding block device and
Yeah, of course... but RBD is primarily used for KVM VMs, so the results from a
VM are the thing that real clients see. So they do mean something... :)
I know. I tested fio before testing cephwith fio. On null ioengine fio can
handle up to 14M IOPS (on my dusty lab's R220). On blk_null to gets
I know. I tested fio before testing ceph
with fio. On null ioengine fio can handle up to 14M IOPS (on my dusty
lab's R220). On blk_null to gets down to 2.4-2.8M IOPS.
On brd it drops to sad 700k IOPS.
BTW, never run synthetic high-performance benchmarks on kvm. My old server
with
By the way, DON'T USE rados bench. It's an incorrect benchmark. ONLY use fio
10 сентября 2020 г. 22:35:53 GMT+03:00, vita...@yourcmc.ru пишет:
>Hi George
>
>Author of Ceph_performance here! :)
>
>I suspect you're running tests with 1 PG. Every PG's requests are
>always serialized, that's why OSD
Hi George
Author of Ceph_performance here! :)
I suspect you're running tests with 1 PG. Every PG's requests are always
serialized, that's why OSD doesn't utilize all threads with 1 PG. You need
something like 8 PGs per OSD. More than 8 usually doesn't improve results.
Also note that read
Thank you!
I know that article, but they promise 6 core use per OSD, and I got barely
over three, and all this in totally synthetic environment with no SDD to
blame (brd is more than fast and have a very consistent latency under any
kind of load).
On Thu, Sep 10, 2020, 19:39 Marc Roos wrote:
>
Hi George,
Very interesting and also a bit expecting result. Some messages posted
here are already indicating that getting expensive top of the line
hardware does not really result in any performance increase above some
level. Vitaliy has documented something similar[1]
[1]
On 9/10/20 11:03 AM, George Shuklin wrote:
I'm creating a benchmark suite for Сeph.
During benchmarking of benchmark, I've checked how fast ceph-osd
works. I decided to skip all 'SSD mess' and use brd (block ram disk,
modprobe brd) as underlying storage. Brd itself can yield up to
2.7Mpps
12 matches
Mail list logo
