Ilya,
Isn’t the network throttling for the guest/public network?  How does it affect 
the primary storage network?


On Aug 18, 2014, at 3:17 PM, ilya musayev <[email protected]> wrote:

> As someone probably already mentioned, check if throttle enabled/set in 
> global settings as well as under network offering.
> 
> Regards
> ilya
> 
> On 8/18/14, 1:01 PM, Carlos Reátegui wrote:
>> You sure VR is traversed for nfs traffic?  In my setup the NAS subnet is 
>> completely separate from any that CS uses.  The hosts know about it but none 
>> of the system vms know about it.
>> 
>> In my setup I am using shared network so the VR is not involved in network 
>> traffic.
>> 
>> One of my setups:
>> NAS (ubuntu nfs, HW raid10 with ssd cache) connected with 10Gbe on a subnet 
>> that CS does not know about other than the ip to the NFS server.
>> XenServer Hosts: 4 x 1Gbe for primary storage, 4x1 Gbe for CloudStack (e.g. 
>> guest, management, secondary storage)
>> 
>> Using bonnie++ I am seeing ~135Mbps read ~109Mbps write from an ubuntu 12.04 
>> vm.
>> 
>> 
>> On Aug 18, 2014, at 10:20 AM, Jeff Crystal <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> Management server: HP Proliant ML350 G5 18GB RAM dual quad-core 2.0Ghz 
>>> server
>>> SAN: HP Proliant ML350 G6 28GB RAM dual quad-core 2.66Ghz server running 
>>> Open-e DSS v7 lite
>>> Virtual Hosts (2 identical servers)
>>> HP Proliant ML 350 G5 24GB RAM 2.66Ghz dual Quad-core with (4) gigabit nics
>>> Public, Guest, Storage, and Management networks are all assigned dedicated 
>>> nics (cloudbr0-3)
>>> 
>>> Using NFS I'm getting 6-7Mbps write and 45-50Mbps read speeds with this 
>>> setup.
>>> 
>>> Using Microsoft software iSCSI from a Windows Vm running in this 
>>> environment and attached to the same SAN, I get 13-14Mbps read/write 
>>> speeds.  (Access to the SAN traverses the virtual router.  I'm not sure if 
>>> this is affecting the speed or not.)
>>> 
>>> From: Carlos Reátegui [mailto:[email protected]]
>>> Sent: Monday, August 18, 2014 1:07 PM
>>> To: [email protected]
>>> Subject: Re: Disk performance
>>> 
>>> What is your network setup?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Aug 18, 2014, at 10:04 AM, Jeff Crystal 
>>> <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]%3e> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> No, I need a shared storage solution. I'm wondering what others are using 
>>>> in place of NFS. OCFS2? GFS2? GlusterFS? I tried setting up CLVM, but it 
>>>> seems very problematic (server won't shut down without manual intervention 
>>>> to leave the cluster, server won't join the cluster on boot without manual 
>>>> commands. Not very enterprisey!) I'll have to give Ceph a look...
>>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Ahmad Emneina [mailto:[email protected]]
>>>> Sent: Monday, August 18, 2014 11:52 AM
>>>> To: Cloudstack users mailing list
>>>> Subject: Re: Disk performance
>>>> 
>>>> local storage is probably your most performant storage type... you dont 
>>>> get the awesome of HA or easy volume recovery, but if all youre after is 
>>>> performance. Thats the one.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 8:47 AM, Randy Smith 
>>>> <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]%3e> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Jeff,
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'm a big fan of ceph for clustered storage for block devices.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Beyond that, there are a bunch of crazy things you can do to tune NFS
>>>>> but it's rarely worth it.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 9:10 AM, Jeff Crystal 
>>>>> <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]%3e>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Anyone have any suggestions for improving disk performance with
>>>>>> Cloudstack and KVM? Using NFS is pretty craptastic, even with
>>>>>> dedicated network adapters and switches for storage traffic.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> [image: JCrystal Signature2013-1]
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> Randall Smith
>>>>> Computing Services
>>>>> Adams State University
>>>>> http://www.adams.edu/
>>>>> 719-587-7741
>>>>> 
>>> 
>>> ________________________________
> 

Reply via email to