Re: Poor performance on 10 Gbps SAN

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Ed, thanks for your quick response. I'll reply inline.

On 06 Sep 2013, at 4:10 PM, Ed Cashin <ecashin@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> * Jumbo frames (9000) configured and working on target, initiator and Dell PowerConnect 8132 switch (with hardware flow control enabled).
> 
> There's an "aoe-sancheck" tool in the aoetools that you can use just to double check network things.  But if you haven't tried it already, using a direct connection for comparison is a good sanity check.

I tried a direct connection but there was no difference. I can however ping with jumbo frames and a dump of AoE traffic shows that it's using 8740-byte packets, so things are looking good at the network layer. Sadly aoe-sancheck doesn't seem to be working for me:

# aoe-sancheck 
Probing...done.
==========================================
INTERFACE SUMMARY
==========================================
Name    Status  MTU     PCI ID
==========================================
DEVICE SUMMARY
==========================================
Device  Macs    Payload Local Interfaces

But aoe-stat gives:
      e0.0     55971.971GB       xgb1 8704  up            
      e0.1         4.294GB       xgb1 8704  up

so at least it chose a decent payload size.

> By the way, are you using the v81 driver that's inside of the 3.10.7 kernel?  If so, how did you know to use the aoetools v36?  I sometimes worry that people won't find it when they notice aoe in the /lib/modules.  (The driver at coraid.com comes bundled with the aoetools.)

I'm using the in-kernel driver, yes. I knew to install aoetools based on a couple of AoE howtos (including Coraid's Linux support howto). I'm using Gentoo so I just installed the latest available versions of aoetools and vblade. I know people have complained about distro support for AoE but Gentoo seems to have done quite well there.

> I don't have a lot of experience with the other non-Coraid AoE targets that are out there, but you might check whether one of them that's oriented more toward performance could be useful to you.

I've avoided kvblade, ggaoed and qaoed because they all look to be unmaintained for years, but I'll give them a try.

> That said, while checking the vblade README for the design goals, I noticed that it advertises a capacity for 16 outstanding commands.  If you want to try some tuning, you could adjust Bufcount in dat.h and then make sure your settings in /proc are sufficient to allow the kernel to buffer 16 writes.  (Read commands are small.)

I'll try that, thanks.

Derick
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Learn the latest--Visual Studio 2012, SharePoint 2013, SQL 2012, more!
Discover the easy way to master current and previous Microsoft technologies
and advance your career. Get an incredible 1,500+ hours of step-by-step
tutorial videos with LearnDevNow. Subscribe today and save!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=58041391&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Aoetools-discuss mailing list
Aoetools-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/aoetools-discuss




[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux