I also thinked about 1 thing fio-lirbd use the rbd_cache value from ceph.conf. and qemu change the value if cache=none or cache=writeback in qemu conf. So, verify that too. I'm thinked of this old bug with cache http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/9513 It was a bug in giant, but tracker said also dumpling and firefly (but no commit for them) But the original bug was http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/9854 and I'm not sure it's already released ----- Mail original ----- De: "Stefan Priebe" <s.priebe@xxxxxxxxxxxx> À: "aderumier" <aderumier@xxxxxxxxx> Cc: "Mark Nelson" <mnelson@xxxxxxxxxx>, "ceph-devel" <ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Envoyé: Lundi 16 Février 2015 15:50:56 Objet: Re: speed decrease since firefly,giant,hammer the 2nd try Hi Mark, Hi Alexandre, Am 16.02.2015 um 10:11 schrieb Alexandre DERUMIER: > Hi Stefan, > > I could be interesting to see if you have the same speed decrease with fio-librbd on the host, > without the qemu layer. > > the perf reports don't seem to be too much different. > do you have the same cpu usage ? (check qemu process usage) the idea to use fio-librbd was very good. I cannot reproduce the behaviour using fio-rbd. I can just reproduce it with qemu. Very strange. So please ignore me for the moment. I'll try to dig deeper into it. Greets, Stefan > ----- Mail original ----- > De: "Stefan Priebe" <s.priebe@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > À: "Mark Nelson" <mnelson@xxxxxxxxxx>, "ceph-devel" <ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Envoyé: Dimanche 15 Février 2015 19:40:45 > Objet: Re: speed decrease since firefly,giant,hammer the 2nd try > > Hi Mark, > > what's next? > > I've this test cluster only for 2 more days. > > Here some perf Details: > > dumpling: > 12,65% libc-2.13.so [.] 0x79000 > 2,86% libc-2.13.so [.] malloc > 2,80% kvm [.] 0xb59c5 > 2,59% libc-2.13.so [.] free > 2,35% [kernel] [k] __schedule > 2,16% [kernel] [k] _raw_spin_lock > 1,92% [kernel] [k] __switch_to > 1,58% [kernel] [k] lapic_next_deadline > 1,09% [kernel] [k] update_sd_lb_stats > 1,08% [kernel] [k] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave > 0,91% librados.so.2.0.0 [.] ceph_crc32c_le_intel > 0,91% libpthread-2.13.so [.] pthread_mutex_trylock > 0,87% [kernel] [k] resched_task > 0,72% [kernel] [k] cpu_startup_entry > 0,71% librados.so.2.0.0 [.] crush_hash32_3 > 0,66% [kernel] [k] leave_mm > 0,65% librados.so.2.0.0 [.] Mutex::Lock(bool) > 0,64% [kernel] [k] idle_cpu > 0,62% libpthread-2.13.so [.] __pthread_mutex_unlock_usercnt > 0,59% [kernel] [k] try_to_wake_up > 0,56% [kernel] [k] wake_futex > 0,50% librados.so.2.0.0 [.] ceph::buffer::ptr::release() > > firefly: > 12,56% libc-2.13.so [.] 0x7905d > 2,82% libc-2.13.so [.] malloc > 2,64% libc-2.13.so [.] free > 2,61% kvm [.] 0x34322f > 2,33% [kernel] [k] __schedule > 2,14% [kernel] [k] _raw_spin_lock > 1,83% [kernel] [k] __switch_to > 1,62% [kernel] [k] lapic_next_deadline > 1,17% [kernel] [k] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave > 1,09% [kernel] [k] update_sd_lb_stats > 1,08% libpthread-2.13.so [.] pthread_mutex_trylock > 0,85% libpthread-2.13.so [.] __pthread_mutex_unlock_usercnt > 0,77% [kernel] [k] resched_task > 0,74% librbd.so.1.0.0 [.] 0x71b73 > 0,72% librados.so.2.0.0 [.] Mutex::Lock(bool) > 0,68% librados.so.2.0.0 [.] crush_hash32_3 > 0,67% [kernel] [k] idle_cpu > 0,65% [kernel] [k] leave_mm > 0,65% [kernel] [k] cpu_startup_entry > 0,59% [kernel] [k] try_to_wake_up > 0,51% librados.so.2.0.0 [.] ceph::buffer::ptr::release() > 0,51% [kernel] [k] wake_futex > > Stefan > > Am 11.02.2015 um 06:42 schrieb Stefan Priebe: >> >> Am 11.02.2015 um 05:45 schrieb Mark Nelson: >>> On 02/10/2015 04:18 PM, Stefan Priebe wrote: >>>> >>>> Am 10.02.2015 um 22:38 schrieb Mark Nelson: >>>>> On 02/10/2015 03:11 PM, Stefan Priebe wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> mhm i installed librbd1-dbg and librados2-dbg - but the output still >>>>>> looks useless to me. Should i upload it somewhere? >>>>> >>>>> Meh, if it's all just symbols it's probably not that helpful. >>>>> >>>>> I've summarized your results here: >>>>> >>>>> 1 concurrent 4k write (libaio, direct=1, iodepth=1) >>>>> >>>>> IOPS Latency >>>>> wb on wb off wb on wb off >>>>> dumpling 10870 536 ~100us ~2ms >>>>> firefly 10350 525 ~100us ~2ms >>>>> >>>>> So in single op tests dumpling and firefly are far closer. Now let's >>>>> see each of these cases with iodepth=32 (still 1 thread for now). >>>> >>>> >>>> dumpling: >>>> >>>> file1: (g=0): rw=randwrite, bs=4K-4K/4K-4K, ioengine=libaio, iodepth=32 >>>> 2.0.8 >>>> Starting 1 thread >>>> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [w] [100.0% done] [0K/72812K /s] [0 /18.3K iops] [eta >>>> 00m:00s] >>>> file1: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=3011 >>>> write: io=2060.6MB, bw=70329KB/s, iops=17582 , runt= 30001msec >>>> slat (usec): min=1 , max=3517 , avg= 3.42, stdev= 7.30 >>>> clat (usec): min=93 , max=7475 , avg=1815.72, stdev=233.43 >>>> lat (usec): min=219 , max=7477 , avg=1819.27, stdev=233.52 >>>> clat percentiles (usec): >>>> | 1.00th=[ 1480], 5.00th=[ 1576], 10.00th=[ 1608], 20.00th=[ >>>> 1672], >>>> | 30.00th=[ 1704], 40.00th=[ 1752], 50.00th=[ 1800], 60.00th=[ >>>> 1832], >>>> | 70.00th=[ 1896], 80.00th=[ 1960], 90.00th=[ 2064], 95.00th=[ >>>> 2128], >>>> | 99.00th=[ 2352], 99.50th=[ 2448], 99.90th=[ 4704], 99.95th=[ >>>> 5344], >>>> | 99.99th=[ 7072] >>>> bw (KB/s) : min=59696, max=77840, per=100.00%, avg=70351.27, >>>> stdev=4783.25 >>>> lat (usec) : 100=0.01%, 250=0.01%, 500=0.01%, 750=0.01%, 1000=0.53% >>>> lat (msec) : 2=85.02%, 4=14.31%, 10=0.13% >>>> cpu : usr=1.96%, sys=6.71%, ctx=22791, majf=0, minf=133 >>>> IO depths : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=100.0%, >>>>> =64=0.0% >>>> submit : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >>>>> =64=0.0% >>>> complete : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.1%, 64=0.0%, >>>>> =64=0.0% >>>> issued : total=r=0/w=527487/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0 >>>> >>>> Run status group 0 (all jobs): >>>> WRITE: io=2060.6MB, aggrb=70329KB/s, minb=70329KB/s, maxb=70329KB/s, >>>> mint=30001msec, maxt=30001msec >>>> >>>> Disk stats (read/write): >>>> sdb: ios=166/526079, merge=0/0, ticks=24/890120, in_queue=890064, >>>> util=98.73% >>>> >>>> firefly: >>>> >>>> file1: (g=0): rw=randwrite, bs=4K-4K/4K-4K, ioengine=libaio, iodepth=32 >>>> 2.0.8 >>>> Starting 1 thread >>>> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [w] [100.0% done] [0K/69096K /s] [0 /17.3K iops] [eta >>>> 00m:00s] >>>> file1: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=2982 >>>> write: io=1784.9MB, bw=60918KB/s, iops=15229 , runt= 30002msec >>>> slat (usec): min=1 , max=1389 , avg= 3.43, stdev= 5.32 >>>> clat (usec): min=117 , max=8235 , avg=2096.88, stdev=396.30 >>>> lat (usec): min=540 , max=8258 , avg=2100.43, stdev=396.61 >>>> clat percentiles (usec): >>>> | 1.00th=[ 1608], 5.00th=[ 1720], 10.00th=[ 1768], 20.00th=[ >>>> 1832], >>>> | 30.00th=[ 1896], 40.00th=[ 1944], 50.00th=[ 2008], 60.00th=[ >>>> 2064], >>>> | 70.00th=[ 2160], 80.00th=[ 2256], 90.00th=[ 2512], 95.00th=[ >>>> 2896], >>>> | 99.00th=[ 3600], 99.50th=[ 3792], 99.90th=[ 5088], 99.95th=[ >>>> 6304], >>>> | 99.99th=[ 6752] >>>> bw (KB/s) : min=36717, max=73712, per=99.94%, avg=60879.92, >>>> stdev=8302.27 >>>> lat (usec) : 250=0.01%, 750=0.01% >>>> lat (msec) : 2=48.56%, 4=51.18%, 10=0.26% >>>> cpu : usr=2.03%, sys=5.48%, ctx=20440, majf=0, minf=133 >>>> IO depths : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=100.0%, >>>>> =64=0.0% >>>> submit : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >>>>> =64=0.0% >>>> complete : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.1%, 64=0.0%, >>>>> =64=0.0% >>>> issued : total=r=0/w=456918/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0 >>>> >>>> Run status group 0 (all jobs): >>>> WRITE: io=1784.9MB, aggrb=60918KB/s, minb=60918KB/s, maxb=60918KB/s, >>>> mint=30002msec, maxt=30002msec >>>> >>>> Disk stats (read/write): >>>> sdb: ios=166/455574, merge=0/0, ticks=12/897748, in_queue=897696, >>>> util=98.96% >>>> >>> >>> Ok, so it looks like as you increase concurrency the effect increases >>> (ie contention?). Does the same thing happen without cache enabled? >> >> here again without rbd cache: >> >> dumpling: >> file1: (g=0): rw=randwrite, bs=4K-4K/4K-4K, ioengine=libaio, iodepth=32 >> 2.0.8 >> Starting 1 thread >> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [w] [100.0% done] [0K/83488K /s] [0 /20.9K iops] [eta >> 00m:00s] >> file1: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=3000 >> write: io=2449.2MB, bw=83583KB/s, iops=20895 , runt= 30005msec >> slat (usec): min=1 , max=975 , avg= 4.50, stdev= 5.25 >> clat (usec): min=364 , max=80566 , avg=1525.87, stdev=1194.57 >> lat (usec): min=519 , max=80568 , avg=1530.51, stdev=1194.44 >> clat percentiles (usec): >> | 1.00th=[ 660], 5.00th=[ 780], 10.00th=[ 876], 20.00th=[ 1032], >> | 30.00th=[ 1144], 40.00th=[ 1240], 50.00th=[ 1304], 60.00th=[ 1384], >> | 70.00th=[ 1480], 80.00th=[ 1640], 90.00th=[ 2096], 95.00th=[ 2960], >> | 99.00th=[ 6816], 99.50th=[ 7840], 99.90th=[11712], 99.95th=[13888], >> | 99.99th=[18816] >> bw (KB/s) : min=47184, max=95432, per=100.00%, avg=83639.19, >> stdev=7973.92 >> lat (usec) : 500=0.01%, 750=3.82%, 1000=14.40% >> lat (msec) : 2=70.57%, 4=7.91%, 10=3.11%, 20=0.17%, 50=0.01% >> lat (msec) : 100=0.01% >> cpu : usr=3.12%, sys=11.49%, ctx=74951, majf=0, minf=133 >> IO depths : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=100.0%, >>> =64=0.0% >> submit : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >>> =64=0.0% >> complete : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.1%, 64=0.0%, >>> =64=0.0% >> issued : total=r=0/w=626979/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0 >> >> Run status group 0 (all jobs): >> WRITE: io=2449.2MB, aggrb=83583KB/s, minb=83583KB/s, maxb=83583KB/s, >> mint=30005msec, maxt=30005msec >> >> Disk stats (read/write): >> sdb: ios=168/625292, merge=0/0, ticks=144/916096, in_queue=916128, >> util=99.93% >> >> >> firefly: >> >> fio --filename=/dev/sdb --direct=1 --rw=randwrite --bs=4k --numjobs=1 >> --thread --iodepth=32 --ioengine=libaio --runtime=30 --group_reporting >> --name=file1 >> file1: (g=0): rw=randwrite, bs=4K-4K/4K-4K, ioengine=libaio, iodepth=32 >> 2.0.8 >> Starting 1 thread >> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [w] [100.0% done] [0K/90044K /s] [0 /22.6K iops] [eta >> 00m:00s] >> file1: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=2970 >> write: io=2372.9MB, bw=80976KB/s, iops=20244 , runt= 30006msec >> slat (usec): min=1 , max=4047 , avg= 4.36, stdev= 7.17 >> clat (usec): min=197 , max=76656 , avg=1575.29, stdev=1165.74 >> lat (usec): min=523 , max=76660 , avg=1579.79, stdev=1165.59 >> clat percentiles (usec): >> | 1.00th=[ 676], 5.00th=[ 804], 10.00th=[ 916], 20.00th=[ 1096], >> | 30.00th=[ 1224], 40.00th=[ 1304], 50.00th=[ 1384], 60.00th=[ 1448], >> | 70.00th=[ 1544], 80.00th=[ 1704], 90.00th=[ 2128], 95.00th=[ 2736], >> | 99.00th=[ 6752], 99.50th=[ 7904], 99.90th=[12096], 99.95th=[14656], >> | 99.99th=[18560] >> bw (KB/s) : min=47800, max=91952, per=99.91%, avg=80900.88, >> stdev=7234.98 >> lat (usec) : 250=0.01%, 500=0.01%, 750=2.95%, 1000=11.38% >> lat (msec) : 2=73.81%, 4=8.81%, 10=2.85%, 20=0.19%, 50=0.01% >> lat (msec) : 100=0.01% >> cpu : usr=2.99%, sys=10.60%, ctx=66549, majf=0, minf=133 >> IO depths : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=100.0%, >>> =64=0.0% >> submit : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >>> =64=0.0% >> complete : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.1%, 64=0.0%, >>> =64=0.0% >> issued : total=r=0/w=607445/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0 >> >> Run status group 0 (all jobs): >> WRITE: io=2372.9MB, aggrb=80976KB/s, minb=80976KB/s, maxb=80976KB/s, >> mint=30006msec, maxt=30006msec >> >> Disk stats (read/write): >> sdb: ios=170/605440, merge=0/0, ticks=156/916492, in_queue=916560, >> util=99.93% >> >> 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
