Hi Xiaoxi,
I would ignore the tails on those tests. I suspect it's just some fio
processes finishing earlier than others and the associated aggregate
performance dropping off. These reads tests are so fast that my
original guess at reasonable volume sizes for 300 second tests appear to
be off.
Mark
On 10/14/2015 10:57 AM, Chen, Xiaoxi wrote:
Hi Mark,
The Async result in 128K drops quickly after some point, is that because of the testing methodology?
Other conclusion looks to me like simple messenger + Jemalloc is the best practice till now as it has the same performance as async but using much less memory?
-Xiaoxi
-----Original Message-----
From: ceph-users [mailto:ceph-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Mark Nelson
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2015 9:03 PM
To: Haomai Wang
Cc: ceph-devel; ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ceph-users] Initial performance cluster SimpleMessenger vs
AsyncMessenger results
Hi Haomai,
Great! I haven't had a chance to dig in and look at it with valgrind yet, but if I
get a chance after I'm done with newstore fragment testing and somnath's
writepath work I'll try to go back and dig in if you haven't had a chance yet.
Mark
On 10/12/2015 09:56 PM, Haomai Wang wrote:
resend
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Haomai Wang <haomaiwang@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
COOL
Interesting that async messenger will consume more memory than
simple, in my mind I always think async should use less memory. I
will give a look at this
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 12:50 AM, Mark Nelson <mnelson@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Hi Guy,
Given all of the recent data on how different memory allocator
configurations improve SimpleMessenger performance (and the effect
of memory allocators and transparent hugepages on RSS memory usage),
I thought I'd run some tests looking how AsyncMessenger does in
comparison. We spoke about these a bit at the last performance
meeting but here's the full write up.
The rough conclusion as of right now appears to be:
1) AsyncMessenger performance is not dependent on the memory
allocator like with SimpleMessenger.
2) AsyncMessenger is faster than SimpleMessenger with TCMalloc +
32MB (ie
default) thread cache.
3) AsyncMessenger is consistently faster than SimpleMessenger for
128K random reads.
4) AsyncMessenger is sometimes slower than SimpleMessenger when
memory allocator optimizations are used.
5) AsyncMessenger currently uses far more RSS memory than
SimpleMessenger.
Here's a link to the paper:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2gTBZrkrnpZS1Q4VktjZkhrNHc/view
Mark
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
--
Best Regards,
Wheat
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
--
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
