Re: RBD fio Performance concerns

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

 



>>Haven't tested that. But does this makes sense? I mean data goes to Disk 
>>journal - same disk then has to copy the Data from part A to part B. 
>>
>>Why is this an advantage? 

Well, if you are cpu limited, I don't think you can use all 8*35000iops by node.
So, maybe a benchmark can tell us if the difference is really big.

Using tmpfs and ups can be ok, but if you have a kernel panic or hardware problem, you'll lost your journal. 



----- Mail original ----- 

De: "Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG" <s.priebe@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 
À: "Mark Nelson" <mark.nelson@xxxxxxxxxxx> 
Cc: "Alexandre DERUMIER" <aderumier@xxxxxxxxx>, "ceph-devel" <ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Mark Kampe" <mark.kampe@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "Sébastien Han" <han.sebastien@xxxxxxxxx> 
Envoyé: Jeudi 22 Novembre 2012 16:01:56 
Objet: Re: RBD fio Performance concerns 

Am 22.11.2012 15:46, schrieb Mark Nelson: 
> I haven't played a whole lot with SSD only OSDs yet (other than noting 
> last summer that iop performance wasn't as high as I wanted it). Is a 
> second partition on the SSD for the journal not an option for you? 

Haven't tested that. But does this makes sense? I mean data goes to Disk 
journal - same disk then has to copy the Data from part A to part B. 

Why is this an advantage? 

Stefan 

> Mark 
> 
> On 11/22/2012 08:42 AM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote: 
>> Am 22.11.2012 15:37, schrieb Mark Nelson: 
>>> I don't think we recommend tmpfs at all for anything other than playing 
>>> around. :) 
>> 
>> I discussed this with somebody frmo inktank. Had to search the 
>> mailinglist. It might be OK if you're working with enough replicas and 
>> UPS. 
>> 
>> I see no other option while working with SSDs - the only Option would be 
>> to be able to deaktivate the journal at all. But ceph does not support 
>> this. 
>> 
>> Stefan 
>> 
>>> On 11/22/2012 08:22 AM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote: 
>>>> Hi, 
>>>> 
>>>> can someone from inktank comment this? Might be using /dev/ram0 with an 
>>>> fs on it be better than tmpfs as we can use dio? 
>>>> 
>>>> Greets, 
>>>> Stefan 
>>>> 
>>>>> ----- Mail original ----- 
>>>>> 
>>>>> De: "Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG" <s.priebe@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 
>>>>> À: "Sébastien Han" <han.sebastien@xxxxxxxxx> 
>>>>> Cc: "Mark Nelson" <mark.nelson@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "Alexandre DERUMIER" 
>>>>> <aderumier@xxxxxxxxx>, "ceph-devel" <ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, 
>>>>> "Mark Kampe" <mark.kampe@xxxxxxxxxxx> 
>>>>> Envoyé: Jeudi 22 Novembre 2012 14:29:03 
>>>>> Objet: Re: RBD fio Performance concerns 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Am 22.11.2012 14:22, schrieb Sébastien Han: 
>>>>>> And RAMDISK devices are too expensive. 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> It would make sense in your infra, but yes they are really expensive. 
>>>>> 
>>>>> We need something like tmpfs - running in local memory but support 
>>>>> dio. 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Stefan 
>>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
> 
> 
--
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


[Index of Archives]     [CEPH Users]     [Ceph Large]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux BTRFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]
  Powered by Linux