Hi Guys,
For what it's worth, we just added SSE 4.2 CRC32c for architectures that
support it:
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commit/7c59288d9168ddef3b3dc570464ae9a1f180d18c#src/common/crc32c-intel.c
Mark
On 07/06/2013 08:45 AM, Andreas Joachim Peters wrote:
HI Loic,
(C)RS stands for the Cauchy Reed-Solomon codes which are based on pure parity operations, while the standard Reed-Solomon codes need more multiplications and are slower.
Considering the checksumming ... for comparison the CRC32 code from libz run's on a 8-core Xeon at ~730 MB/s for small block sizes while SSE4.2 CRC32C checksum run's at ~2GByte/s.
Cheers Andreas.
________________________________________
From: Loic Dachary [loic@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 05 July 2013 23:23
To: Andreas Joachim Peters
Cc: ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: CEPH Erasure Encoding + OSD Scalability
Hi Andreas,
On 04/07/2013 23:01, Andreas Joachim Peters wrote:> Hi Loic,
thanks for the responses!
Maybe this is useful for your erasure code discussion:
as an example in our RS implementation we chunk a data block of e.g. 4M into 4 data chunks of 1M. Then we create a 2 parity chunks.
Data & parity chunks are split into 4k blocks and these 4k blocks get a CRC32C block checksum each (SSE4.2 CPU extension => MIT library or BTRFS). This creates 0.1% volume overhead (4 bytes per 4096 bytes) - nothing compared to the parity overhead ...
You can now easily detect data corruption using the local checksums and avoid to read any parity information and (C)RS decoding if there is no corruption detected. Moreover CRC32C computation is distributed over several (in this case 4) machines while (C)RS decoding would run on a single machine where you assemble a block ... and CRC32C is faster than (C)RS decoding (with SSE4.2) ...
What does (C)RS mean ? (C)Reed-Solomon ?
In our case we write this checksum information separate from the original data ... while in a block-based storage like CEPH it would be probably inlined in the data chunk.
If an OSD detects to run on BRTFS or ZFS one could disable automatically the CRC32C code.
Nice. I did not know that was built-in :-)
https://github.com/dachary/ceph/blob/wip-4929/doc/dev/osd_internals/erasure-code.rst#scrubbing
(wouldn't CRC32C be also useful for normal CEPH block replication? )
I don't know the details of scrubbing but it seems CRC is already used by deep scrubbing
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/blob/master/src/osd/PG.cc#L2731
Cheers
As far as I know with the RS CODEC we use you can either miss stripes (data =0) in the decoding process but you cannot inject corrupted stripes into the decoding process, so the block checksumming is important.
Cheers Andreas.
--
Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good people do nothing.
--
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
--
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
