On 25/7/19 9:32 pm, Виталий Филиппов wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> I reread your initial email - do you also run a nanoceph on some SBCs
> each having one 2.5" 5400rpm HDD plugged into it? What SBCs do you use? :-)
I presently have a 5-node Ceph cluster:
- 3× Supermicro A1SAi-2750F with 1 120GB 2.5"
Hi again,
I reread your initial email - do you also run a nanoceph on some SBCs each
having one 2.5" 5400rpm HDD plugged into it? What SBCs do you use? :-)
--
With best regards,
Vitaliy Filippov___
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
Cache=writeback is perfectly safe, it's flushed when the guest calls fsync, so
journaled filesystems and databases don't lose data that's committed to the
journal.
25 июля 2019 г. 2:28:26 GMT+03:00, Stuart Longland
пишет:
>On 25/7/19 9:01 am, vita...@yourcmc.ru wrote:
>>> 60 millibits per
On 25/7/19 9:01 am, vita...@yourcmc.ru wrote:
60 millibits per second? 60 bits every 1000 seconds? Are you serious?
Or did we get the capitalisation wrong?
Assuming 60MB/sec (as 60 Mb/sec would still be slower than the 5MB/sec I
was getting), maybe there's some characteristic that Bluestore
60 millibits per second? 60 bits every 1000 seconds? Are you serious?
Or did we get the capitalisation wrong?
Assuming 60MB/sec (as 60 Mb/sec would still be slower than the 5MB/sec
I
was getting), maybe there's some characteristic that Bluestore is
particularly dependent on regarding the
On 25/7/19 8:48 am, Vitaliy Filippov wrote:
> I get 60 mb/s inside a VM in my home nano-ceph consisting of 5 HDDs 4 of
> which are inside one PC and 5th is plugged into a ROCK64 :)) I use
> Bluestore...
60 millibits per second? 60 bits every 1000 seconds? Are you serious?
Or did we get the
/dev/vdb:
Timing cached reads: 2556 MB in 1.99 seconds = 1281.50 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 62 MB in 3.03 seconds = 20.48 MB/sec
That is without any special tuning, just migrating back to FileStore…
journal is on the HDD (it wouldn't let me put it on the SSD like it did
last
On 23/7/19 9:59 pm, Stuart Longland wrote:
> I'll do some proper measurements once the migration is complete.
A starting point (I accept more rigorous disk storage tests exist):
> virtatomos ~ # hdparm -tT /dev/vdb
>
> /dev/vdb:
> Timing cached reads: 2556 MB in 1.99 seconds = 1281.50 MB/sec
On 19/7/19 8:21 pm, Stuart Longland wrote:
> I'm now getting about 5MB/sec I/O speeds in my VMs.
>
> I'm contemplating whether I migrate back to using Filestore (on XFS this
> time, since BTRFS appears to be a rude word despite Ceph v10 docs
> suggesting it as a good option), but I'm not sure
Linear reads, `hdparm -t /dev/vda`.
Check if you have `cache=writeback` enabled in your VM options.
If it's enabled but you still get 5mb/s then try to benchmark your cluster
with fio -ioengine=rbd from outside a VM.
Like
fio -ioengine=rbd -name=test -bs=4M -iodepth=16 -rw=read
On 22/7/19 7:39 pm, Vitaliy Filippov wrote:
> 5MB/s in what mode?
Linear reads, `hdparm -t /dev/vda`.
> For linear writes, that definitely means some kind of misconfiguration.
> For random writes... there's a handbrake in Bluestore which makes random
> writes run at half speed in HDD-only setups
On 22/7/19 7:13 pm, Marc Roos wrote:
>
> >> Reverting back to filestore is quite a lot of work and time again.
> >> Maybe see first if with some tuning of the vms you can get better
> results?
> >
> >None of the VMs are particularly disk-intensive. There's two users
> accessing the system
5MB/s in what mode?
For linear writes, that definitely means some kind of misconfiguration.
For random writes... there's a handbrake in Bluestore which makes random
writes run at half speed in HDD-only setups :)
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/26909
And if you push that handbrake down
>> Reverting back to filestore is quite a lot of work and time again.
>> Maybe see first if with some tuning of the vms you can get better
results?
>
>None of the VMs are particularly disk-intensive. There's two users
accessing the system over a WiFi network for email, and some HTTP/SMTP
On 20/7/19 11:53 pm, Marc Roos wrote:
> Reverting back to filestore is quite a lot of work and time again. Maybe
> see first if with some tuning of the vms you can get better results?
None of the VMs are particularly disk-intensive. There's two users
accessing the system over a WiFi network for
On 20/7/19 11:53 pm, Marc Roos wrote:
> Reverting back to filestore is quite a lot of work and time again. Maybe
> see first if with some tuning of the vms you can get better results?
None of the VMs are particularly disk-intensive. There's two users
accessing the system over a WiFi network for
that is
writing constantly to disk.
With such setup you are at least secured for the future.
-Original Message-
From: Stuart Longland [mailto:stua...@longlandclan.id.au]
Subject: Re: [ceph-users] Future of Filestore?
>
> Maybe a bit of topic, just curious what speeds did you get prev
On 19/7/19 8:43 pm, Marc Roos wrote:
>
> Maybe a bit of topic, just curious what speeds did you get previously?
> Depending on how you test your native drive of 5400rpm, the performance
> could be similar. 4k random read of my 7200rpm/5400 rpm results in
> ~60iops at 260kB/s.
Well, to be
Den fre 19 juli 2019 kl 12:43 skrev Marc Roos :
>
> Maybe a bit of topic, just curious what speeds did you get previously?
> Depending on how you test your native drive of 5400rpm, the performance
> could be similar. 4k random read of my 7200rpm/5400 rpm results in
> ~60iops at 260kB/s.
> I also
, is this not
something else? Maybe some dangerous caching method was on?
-Original Message-
From: Stuart Longland [mailto:stua...@longlandclan.id.au]
Sent: vrijdag 19 juli 2019 12:22
To: ceph-users
Subject: [ceph-users] Future of Filestore?
Hi all,
Earlier this year, I did a migration from
Hi all,
Earlier this year, I did a migration from Ceph 10 to 12. Previously, I
was happily running Ceph v10 on Filestore with BTRFS, and getting
reasonable performance.
Moving to Ceph v12 necessitated a migration away from this set-up, and
reading the documentation, Bluestore seemed to be "the
21 matches
Mail list logo
