It`s ok! Output: 2012-11-04 16:19:23.195891 osd.0 [INF] bench: wrote 1024 MB in blocks of 4096 KB in 11.441035 sec at 91650 KB/sec 2012-11-04 16:19:24.981631 osd.1 [INF] bench: wrote 1024 MB in blocks of 4096 KB in 13.225048 sec at 79287 KB/sec 2012-11-04 16:19:25.672896 osd.2 [INF] bench: wrote 1024 MB in blocks of 4096 KB in 13.917157 sec at 75344 KB/sec 2012-11-04 16:19:28.058517 osd.21 [INF] bench: wrote 1024 MB in blocks of 4096 KB in 16.453375 sec at 63730 KB/sec 2012-11-04 16:19:28.715552 osd.22 [INF] bench: wrote 1024 MB in blocks of 4096 KB in 17.108887 sec at 61288 KB/sec 2012-11-04 16:19:23.440054 osd.23 [INF] bench: wrote 1024 MB in blocks of 4096 KB in 11.834639 sec at 88602 KB/sec 2012-11-04 16:19:24.023650 osd.24 [INF] bench: wrote 1024 MB in blocks of 4096 KB in 12.418276 sec at 84438 KB/sec 2012-11-04 16:19:24.617514 osd.25 [INF] bench: wrote 1024 MB in blocks of 4096 KB in 13.011955 sec at 80585 KB/sec 2012-11-04 16:19:25.148613 osd.26 [INF] bench: wrote 1024 MB in blocks of 4096 KB in 13.541710 sec at 77433 KB/sec All the best. 2012/11/4 Gregory Farnum <greg@xxxxxxxxxxx>: > [Sorry for the blank email; I missed!] > On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Aleksey Samarin <nrg3tik@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Hi! >> This command? ceph tell osd \* bench >> Output: tell target 'osd' not a valid entity name > > I guess it's "ceph osd tell \* bench". Try that one. :) > >> Well, i did pool by command ceph osd pool create bench2 120 >> This output of rados -p bench2 bench 30 write --no-cleanup >> >> rados -p bench2 bench 30 write --no-cleanup >> >> Maintaining 16 concurrent writes of 4194304 bytes for at least 30 seconds. >> Object prefix: benchmark_data_host01_5827 >> sec Cur ops started finished avg MB/s cur MB/s last lat avg lat >> 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 >> 1 16 29 13 51.9885 52 0.489268 0.186749 >> 2 16 52 36 71.9866 92 1.87226 0.711888 >> 3 16 57 41 54.657 20 0.089697 0.697821 >> 4 16 60 44 43.9923 12 1.61868 0.765361 >> 5 16 60 44 35.1941 0 - 0.765361 >> 6 16 60 44 29.3285 0 - 0.765361 >> 7 16 60 44 25.1388 0 - 0.765361 >> 8 16 61 45 22.4964 1 5.89643 0.879384 >> 9 16 62 46 20.4412 4 6.0234 0.991211 >> 10 16 62 46 18.3971 0 - 0.991211 >> 11 16 63 47 17.0883 2 8.79749 1.1573 >> 12 16 63 47 15.6643 0 - 1.1573 >> 13 16 63 47 14.4593 0 - 1.1573 >> 14 16 63 47 13.4266 0 - 1.1573 >> 15 16 63 47 12.5315 0 - 1.1573 >> 16 16 63 47 11.7483 0 - 1.1573 >> 17 16 63 47 11.0572 0 - 1.1573 >> 18 16 63 47 10.4429 0 - 1.1573 >> 19 16 63 47 9.89331 0 - 1.1573 >> 2012-11-04 15:58:15.473733min lat: 0.036475 max lat: 8.79749 avg lat: 1.1573 >> sec Cur ops started finished avg MB/s cur MB/s last lat avg lat >> 20 16 63 47 9.39865 0 - 1.1573 >> 21 16 63 47 8.95105 0 - 1.1573 >> 22 16 63 47 8.54419 0 - 1.1573 >> 23 16 63 47 8.17271 0 - 1.1573 >> 24 16 63 47 7.83218 0 - 1.1573 >> 25 16 63 47 7.5189 0 - 1.1573 >> 26 16 63 47 7.22972 0 - 1.1573 >> 27 16 81 65 9.62824 4.5 0.076456 4.9428 >> 28 16 118 102 14.5693 148 0.427273 4.34095 >> 29 16 119 103 14.2049 4 1.57897 4.31414 >> 30 16 132 116 15.4645 52 2.25424 4.01492 >> 31 16 133 117 15.0946 4 0.974652 3.98893 >> 32 16 133 117 14.6229 0 - 3.98893 >> Total time run: 32.575351 >> Total writes made: 133 >> Write size: 4194304 >> Bandwidth (MB/sec): 16.331 >> >> Stddev Bandwidth: 31.8794 >> Max bandwidth (MB/sec): 148 >> Min bandwidth (MB/sec): 0 >> Average Latency: 3.91583 >> Stddev Latency: 7.42821 >> Max latency: 25.24 >> Min latency: 0.036475 >> >> Im think problem not in pg. This output of ceph pg dump > >> http://pastebin.com/BqLsyMBC > > Well, that did improve it a bit; but yes, I think there's something > else going on. Just wanted to verify. :) > >> >> I have still no idea. >> >> All the best. Alex >> >> >> >> 2012/11/4 Gregory Farnum <greg@xxxxxxxxxxx>: >>> On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Aleksey Samarin <nrg3tik@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> Hi all >>>> >>>> Im planning use ceph for cloud storage. >>>> My test setup is 2 servers connected via infiniband 40Gb, 6x2Tb disks per node. >>>> Centos 6.2 >>>> Ceph 0.52 from http://ceph.com/rpms/el6/x86_64 >>>> This is my config http://pastebin.com/Pzxafnsm >>>> journal on tmpfs >>>> well, im create bench pool and test it: >>>> ceph osd pool create bench >>>> rados -p bench bench 30 write >>>> >>>> Total time run: 43.258228 >>>> Total writes made: 151 >>>> Write size: 4194304 >>>> Bandwidth (MB/sec): 13.963 >>>> Stddev Bandwidth: 26.307 >>>> Max bandwidth (MB/sec): 128 >>>> Min bandwidth (MB/sec): 0 >>>> Average Latency: 4.48605 >>>> Stddev Latency: 8.17709 >>>> Max latency: 29.7957 >>>> Min latency: 0.039435 >>>> >>>> when i do rados -p bench bench 30 seq >>>> Total time run: 20.626935 >>>> Total reads made: 275 >>>> Read size: 4194304 >>>> Bandwidth (MB/sec): 53.328 >>>> Average Latency: 1.19754 >>>> Max latency: 7.0215 >>>> Min latency: 0.011647 >>>> >>>> I tested the single drive via dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/hdd2/testfile >>>> bs=1024k count=20000 >>>> result: 158 MB/sec >>>> >>>> Anyone can tell me why such a weak performance? Maybe I missed something? >>> >>> Can you run "ceph tell osd \* bench" and report the results? (It'll go >>> to the "central log" which you can keep an eye on if you run "ceph -w" >>> in another terminal.) >>> I think you also didn't create your bench pool correctly; it probably >>> only has 8 PGs which is not going to perform very well with your disk >>> count. Try "ceph pool create bench2 120" and run the benchmark against >>> that pool. The extra number at the end tells it to create 120 >>> placement groups. >>> -Greg -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
