Re: Unexpectedly slow write performance (RBD cinder volumes)

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

 



Hey Greg,

I encountered a similar problem and we're just in the process of
tracking it down here on the list.  Try downgrading your OSD-binaries to
0.61.8 Cuttlefish and re-test.  If it's significantly faster on RBD,
you're probably experiencing the same problem I have with Dumpling.

PS: Only downgrade your OSDs.  Cuttlefish-monitors don't seem to want to
start with a database that has been touched by a Dumpling-monitor and
don't talk to them, either.

PPS: I've also had OSDs no longer start with an assert while processing
the journal during these upgrade/downgrade-tests, mostly when coming
down from Dumpling to Cuttlefish.  If you encounter those, delete your
journal and re-create with `ceph-osd -i <OSD-ID> --mkjournal'.  Your
data-store will be OK, as far as I can tell.


   Regards,

     Oliver

On do, 2013-08-22 at 10:55 -0700, Greg Poirier wrote:
> I have been benchmarking our Ceph installation for the last week or
> so, and I've come across an issue that I'm having some difficulty
> with.
> 
> 
> Ceph bench reports reasonable write throughput at the OSD level:
> 
> 
> ceph tell osd.0 bench
> { "bytes_written": 1073741824,
>   "blocksize": 4194304,
>   "bytes_per_sec": "47288267.000000"}
> 
> 
> Running this across all OSDs produces on average 50-55 MB/s, which is
> fine with us. We were expecting around 100 MB/s / 2 (journal and OSD
> on same disk, separate partitions).
> 
> 
> What I wasn't expecting was the following:
> 
> 
> I tested 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, and 32 VMSs simultaneously writing
> against 33 OSDs. Aggregate write throughput peaked under 400 MB/s:
> 
> 
> 1  196.013671875
> 2  285.8759765625
> 4  351.9169921875
> 8  386.455078125
> 16 363.8583984375
> 24 353.6298828125
> 32 348.9697265625
> 
> 
> 
> I was hoping to see something closer to # OSDs * Average value for
> ceph bench (approximately 1.2 GB/s peak aggregate write throughput).
> 
> 
> We're seeing excellent read, randread performance, but writes are a
> bit of a bother.
> 
> 
> Does anyone have any suggestions?
> 
> 
> We have 20 Gb/s network
> I used Fio w/ 16 thread concurrency
> We're running Scientific Linux 6.4
> 2.6.32 kernel
> Ceph Dumpling 0.67.1-0.el6
> OpenStack Grizzly
> Libvirt 0.10.2
> qemu-kvm 0.12.1.2-2.355.el6.2.cuttlefish
> 
> (I'm using qemu-kvm from the ceph-extras repository, which doesn't
> appear to have a -.dumpling version yet).
> 
> 
> Thanks very much for any assistance.
> 
> 
> Greg
> _______________________________________________
> ceph-users mailing list
> ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com


_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com




[Index of Archives]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Ceph Development]     [Ceph Large]     [Linux USB Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [xfs]


  Powered by Linux