export ST_AUTH=http://p01-2/authexport ST_USER=demo:swiftexport ST_KEY=BHL1OxwdC2o737QPAOFR90b8oruqr\/aZJDvW8hAJ
Hi Hugo
Thanks for your reply.
I have a pretty similar setup, only difference is:
1) 12 disks per node, so a total of 36disks/osd’s
2) The SSD’s I got (one per server) is not faster than a single disk, so putting the jornals of 12 osd’s to one of those slow ssd’s is creating a bottleneck, so for the moment we have the journals on the osd’s
3) Thest on rados block devices look promising
But I’m stuck with ssbench and permission, I have a rados user whih I can successfully test with cyberduck, I created a swift subuser user, but when I start ssbench with:
ssbench-master run-scenario -f 1kb-put.sc -u 1 -o 10000 -k --workers 1 -A http://10.100.218.131 -U testuser:swift -K O3AdvL9OINHX2fDGeUeSf+GVfvq3YUrzR+BRHM32
I get
INFO:Spawning local ssbench-worker (logging to /tmp/ssbench-worker-local-0.log) with ssbench-worker --zmq-host 127.0.0.1 --zmq-work-port 13579 --zmq-results-port 13580 --concurrency 1 --batch-size 1 0
INFO:Starting scenario run for "1KB-put"
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/bin/ssbench-master", line 597, in <module>
args.func(args)
File "/usr/bin/ssbench-master", line 222, in run_scenario
run_results=run_results)
File "/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/ssbench/master.py", line 320, in run_scenario
storage_urls, c_token = self._authenticate(auth_kwargs)
File "/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/ssbench/master.py", line 280, in _authenticate
storage_url, token = client.get_auth(**auth_kwargs)
File "/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/ssbench/swift_client.py", line 294, in get_auth
kwargs.get('snet'))
File "/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/ssbench/swift_client.py", line 220, in get_auth_1_0
http_reason=resp.reason)
ssbench.swift_client.ClientException: Auth GET failed: http://10.100.218.131:80 200 OK
how did you declare user and key?
Regards
Andi
From: Kuo Hugo [mailto:tonytkdk@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Dienstag, 10. September 2013 17:59
To: Fuchs, Andreas (SwissTXT)
Subject: Re: [RadosGW] Performance for Concurrency Connections
Hi Andreas,
1) I deployed the cluster by *ceph-deploy* tool from node p01
2) Three Monitor servers distributed to three Rados nodes (s01,s02,s03)
3) Each node has a 120GB SSD which parted into 10 partitions for OSD's journal (sdf1~sdf10 GPT)
4) Each OSD is using a single HDD. There're 10 OSDs on a node. So that we have 30 OSDs in total.
5) Checked the cluster status by ceph -w , It looks good.
6) Install RadosGW on p01
7) Created .rgw & .rgw.buckets manually with size=3 min_size=2
8) Added user demo and sub-user demo:swift.
9) Install ssbench and swift common tool on SSBENCH node.
10) running ssbench with 1KB object
[1kb-put.sc scenario sample file ]
{
"name": "1KB-put",
"sizes": [{
"name": "1KB",
"size_min": 1024,
"size_max": 1024
}],
"initial_files": {
"1KB": 1000
},
"operation_count": 500,
"crud_profile": [1, 0, 0, 0],
"user_count": 10
}
[My ssbench command]
ssbench-master run-scenario -f 1kb-put.sc -u 100 -o 10000 -k --workers 20
the -u parameter means the concurrency clients .
+Hugo Kuo+
2013/9/10 Fuchs, Andreas (SwissTXT) <Andreas.Fuchs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Hi Hugo
I have exactly the same setting as you. Can you provide some more details on how you did setup the test, I really like to reproduce and verify.
Also our radosgw is public reachable 193.218.100.130 maybe you have a minute or two to benchmark our radosgw J
Regards
Andi
From: ceph-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ceph-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Kuo Hugo
Sent: Dienstag, 10. September 2013 15:26
To: ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [RadosGW] Performance for Concurrency Connections
Hi folks,
I'm doing some performance benchmark for RadosGW.
My benchmark tools is ssbench & swift-bench.
I found that the best reqs/sec performance is on concurrency 100.
32 CPU threads on RadosGW
24 CPU threads on each Rados Node
The Network is all 10Gb
For 1KB object PUT :
Concurrency-50 : 538 reqs/sec
Concurrency-100 : 1159.1 reqs/sec
Concurrency-200 : 502.5 reqs/sec
Concurrency-500 : 204 reqs/sec
Concurrency-1000 : 153 reqs/sec
I think the bottleneck is on RadosGW. How to improve it for high concurrency cases ?
Appreciate
+Hugo Kuo+
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
