Hi all,
just an update - but an important one - of the previous benchmark with 2
new "10 DWPD class" contenders :
- Seagate 1200 - ST200FM0053 - SAS 12Gb/s
- Intel DC S3700 - SATA 6Gb/s
The graph :
http://www.4shared.com/download/yaeJgJiFce/Perf-SSDs-Toshiba-Seagate-Inte.png?lgfp=3000
Speaking of SSD IOPs. Running the same tests on my SSDs (LiteOn
ECT-480N9S 480GB SSDs):
The lines at the bottom are a single 6TB spinning disk for comparison's sake.
http://imgur.com/a/fD0Mh
Based on these numbers, there is a minimum latency per operation, but
multiple operations can be performed
Hi,
in our quest to get the right SSD for OSD journals, I managed to
benchmark two kind of "10 DWPD" SSDs :
- Toshiba M2 PX02SMF020
- Samsung 845DC PRO
I wan't to determine if a disk is appropriate considering its absolute
performances, and the optimal number of ceph-osd processes using the S
be 128/4 = 32x write amplification.
> >
> > (of course ssd algorithms and optimisations reduce this write
> > amplification).
> >
> > Now, it could be great to see if it's coming from osd journal or osd
> > datas.
> >
> > (not tested,
educe amplification.
>
> Don't known how ssd internal algorithms work for this.
>
>
> - Mail original -
> De: "aderumier"
> À: "Christian Balzer"
> Cc: "ceph-users"
> Envoyé: Lundi 23 Mars 2015 07:36:48
> Objet: Re: [
7;t known how ssd internal algorithms work for this.
- Mail original -
De: "aderumier"
À: "Christian Balzer"
Cc: "ceph-users"
Envoyé: Lundi 23 Mars 2015 07:36:48
Objet: Re: [ceph-users] SSD Hardware recommendation
Hi,
Isn't it in the nature of ssd to ha
7;s coming from osd journal or osd datas.
(not tested, but I think with journal and O_DSYNC writes, it can give use ssd
write amplification)
- Mail original -
De: "Christian Balzer"
À: "ceph-users"
Envoyé: Lundi 23 Mars 2015 03:11:39
Objet: Re: [ceph-users] SSD Hardw
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 02:33:20 +0100 Francois Lafont wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sorry Christian for my late answer. I was a little busy.
>
> Christian Balzer a wrote:
>
> > You're asking the wrong person, as I'm neither a Ceph or kernel
> > developer. ^o^
>
> No, no, the rest of the message proves to me t
Hi,
Sorry Christian for my late answer. I was a little busy.
Christian Balzer a wrote:
> You're asking the wrong person, as I'm neither a Ceph or kernel
> developer. ^o^
No, no, the rest of the message proves to me that I talk to the
right person. ;)
> Back then Mark Nelson from the Ceph team
> On 19 Mar 2015, at 08:17, Christian Balzer wrote:
>
> On Wed, 18 Mar 2015 08:59:14 +0100 Josef Johansson wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>>> On 18 Mar 2015, at 05:29, Christian Balzer wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> On Wed, 18 Mar 2015 03:52:22 +0100 Josef Johansson wrote:
>>
> [snip]
We thou
Hello,
On Wed, 18 Mar 2015 11:41:17 +0100 Francois Lafont wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Christian Balzer wrote :
>
> > Consider what you think your IO load (writes) generated by your
> > client(s) will be, multiply that by your replication factor, divide by
> > the number of OSDs, that will give you the ba
On Wed, 18 Mar 2015 08:59:14 +0100 Josef Johansson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > On 18 Mar 2015, at 05:29, Christian Balzer wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > On Wed, 18 Mar 2015 03:52:22 +0100 Josef Johansson wrote:
>
[snip]
> >> We though of doing a cluster with 3 servers, and any recommendation of
> >
Hi,
Christian Balzer wrote :
> Consider what you think your IO load (writes) generated by your client(s)
> will be, multiply that by your replication factor, divide by the number of
> OSDs, that will give you the base load per OSD.
> Then multiply by 2 (journal on OSD) per OSD.
> Finally based o
Johansson"
À: "aderumier"
Cc: "ceph-users"
Envoyé: Mercredi 18 Mars 2015 09:04:23
Objet: Re: [ceph-users] SSD Hardware recommendation
Hi Alexandre,
I actually have been searching for this information a couple of times in the ML
now.
Was hoping that you would
gt; I'm going to use intel s3610 ssd for my production cluster, can't comment
> about samsung drive.
>
>
> I'll try to post benchmark results in coming weeks.
>
>
> - Mail original -
> De: "Josef Johansson"
> À: "ceph-users"
>
Hi,
> On 18 Mar 2015, at 05:29, Christian Balzer wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, 18 Mar 2015 03:52:22 +0100 Josef Johansson wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I’m planning a Ceph SSD cluster, I know that we won’t get the full
>> performance from the SSD in this case, but SATA won’t cut it as backend
>> s
x27;t
need too fast/many cores.
I'm going to use intel s3610 ssd for my production cluster, can't comment about
samsung drive.
I'll try to post benchmark results in coming weeks.
- Mail original -
De: "Josef Johansson"
À: "ceph-users"
Envoyé: Merc
Hello,
On Wed, 18 Mar 2015 03:52:22 +0100 Josef Johansson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I’m planning a Ceph SSD cluster, I know that we won’t get the full
> performance from the SSD in this case, but SATA won’t cut it as backend
> storage and SAS is the same price as SSD now.
>
Have you actually tested SAT
Hi,
I’m planning a Ceph SSD cluster, I know that we won’t get the full performance
from the SSD in this case, but SATA won’t cut it as backend storage and SAS is
the same price as SSD now.
The backend network will be a 10GbE active/passive, but will be used mainly for
MySQL, so we’re aiming fo
19 matches
Mail list logo
