Hi Sage, If I recall correctly during the summit you mentioned that it was possible to disable the journal. Is it still part of the plan? –––– Sébastien Han Cloud Engineer "Always give 100%. Unless you're giving blood.” Phone: +33 (0)1 49 70 99 72 Mail: sebastien.han@xxxxxxxxxxxx Address : 10, rue de la Victoire - 75009 Paris Web : www.enovance.com - Twitter : @enovance On 25 Nov 2013, at 10:00, Sebastien Han <sebastien.han@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Nice job Haomai! > > –––– > Sébastien Han > Cloud Engineer > > "Always give 100%. Unless you're giving blood.” > > Phone: +33 (0)1 49 70 99 72 > Mail: sebastien.han@xxxxxxxxxxxx > Address : 10, rue de la Victoire - 75009 Paris > Web : www.enovance.com - Twitter : @enovance > > On 25 Nov 2013, at 02:50, Haomai Wang <haomaiwang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 2:17 AM, Mark Nelson <mark.nelson@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Great Work! This is very exciting! Did you happen to try RADOS bench at different object sizes and concurrency levels? >> >> >> Maybe can try it later. :-) >> >> Mark >> >> >> On 11/24/2013 03:01 AM, Haomai Wang wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> For Emperor >> blueprint(http://wiki.ceph.com/01Planning/02Blueprints/Emperor/Add_LevelDB_support_to_ceph_cluster_backend_store), >> I'm sorry to delay the progress. Now, I have done the most of the works >> for the blueprint's goal. Because of sage's F >> blueprint(http://wiki.ceph.com/index.php?title=01Planning/02Blueprints/Firefly/osd:_new_key%2F%2Fvalue_backend), >> I need to adjust some codes to match it. The branch is >> here(https://github.com/yuyuyu101/ceph/tree/wip/6173). >> >> I have tested the LevelDB backend on three nodes(eight OSDs) and compare >> it to FileStore(ext4). I just use intern benchmark tool "rados bench" to >> get the comparison. The default ceph configurations is used and >> replication size is 2. The filesystem is ext4 and no others changed. The >> results is below: >> >> *Rados Bench* >> >> >> >> *Bandwidth(MB/sec)* >> >> >> >> *Average Latency* >> >> >> >> *Max Latency* >> >> >> >> *Min Latency* >> >> >> >> *Stddev Latency* >> >> >> >> *Stddev Bandwidth(MB/sec)* >> >> >> >> *Max Bandwidth(MB/sec)* >> >> >> >> *Min Bandwidth(MB/sec)* >> >> >> >> >> *KVStore* >> >> >> >> *FileStore* >> >> >> >> *KVStore* >> >> >> >> *FileStore* >> >> >> >> *KVStore* >> >> >> >> *FileStore* >> >> >> >> *KVStore* >> >> >> >> *FileStore* >> >> >> >> *KVStore* >> >> >> >> *FileStore* >> >> >> >> *KVStore* >> >> >> >> *FileStore* >> >> >> >> *KVStore* >> >> >> >> *FileStore* >> >> >> >> *KVStore* >> >> >> >> *FileStore* >> >> *Write 30* >> >> >> >> >> 24.590 >> >> >> >> 23.495 >> >> >> >> 4.87257 >> >> >> >> 5.07716 >> >> >> >> 14.752 >> >> >> >> 13.0885 >> >> >> >> 0.580851 >> >> >> >> 0.605118 >> >> >> >> 2.97708 >> >> >> >> 3.30538 >> >> >> >> 9.91938 >> >> >> >> 10.5986 >> >> >> >> 44 >> >> >> >> 76 >> >> >> >> 0 >> >> >> >> 0 >> >> *Write 20* >> >> >> >> >> 23.515 >> >> >> >> 23.064 >> >> >> >> 3.39745 >> >> >> >> 3.45711 >> >> >> >> 11.6089 >> >> >> >> 11.5996 >> >> >> >> 0.169507 >> >> >> >> 0.138595 >> >> >> >> 2.58285 >> >> >> >> 2.75962 >> >> >> >> 9.14467 >> >> >> >> 8.54156 >> >> >> >> 44 >> >> >> >> 40 >> >> >> >> 0 >> >> >> >> 0 >> >> *Write 10* >> >> >> >> >> 22.927 >> >> >> >> 21.980 >> >> >> >> 1.73815 >> >> >> >> 1.8198 >> >> >> >> 5.53792 >> >> >> >> 6.46675 >> >> >> >> 0.171028 >> >> >> >> 0.143392 >> >> >> >> 1.05982 >> >> >> >> 1.20303 >> >> >> >> 9.18403 >> >> >> >> 8.74401 >> >> >> >> 44 >> >> >> >> 40 >> >> >> >> 0 >> >> >> >> 0 >> >> *Write 5* >> >> >> >> >> 19.680 >> >> >> >> 20.017 >> >> >> >> 1.01492 >> >> >> >> 0.997019 >> >> >> >> 3.10783 >> >> >> >> 3.05008 >> >> >> >> 0.143758 >> >> >> >> 0.138161 >> >> >> >> 0.561548 >> >> >> >> 0.571459 >> >> >> >> 5.92575 >> >> >> >> 6.844 >> >> >> >> 36 >> >> >> >> 32 >> >> >> >> 0 >> >> >> >> 0 >> >> *Read 30* >> >> >> >> >> 65.852 >> >> >> >> 60.688 >> >> >> >> 1.80069 >> >> >> >> 1.96009 >> >> >> >> 9.30039 >> >> >> >> 10.1146 >> >> >> >> 0.115153 >> >> >> >> 0.061657 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *Read 20* >> >> >> >> >> 59.372 >> >> >> >> 60.738 >> >> >> >> 1.30479 >> >> >> >> 1.28383 >> >> >> >> 6.28435 >> >> >> >> 8.21304 >> >> >> >> 0.016843 >> >> >> >> 0.012073 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *Read 10* >> >> >> >> >> 65.502 >> >> >> >> 55.814 >> >> >> >> 0.608805 >> >> >> >> 0.7087 >> >> >> >> 3.3917 >> >> >> >> 4.72626 >> >> >> >> 0.016267 >> >> >> >> 0.011998 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *Read 5* >> >> >> >> >> 64.176 >> >> >> >> 54.928 >> >> >> >> 0.307111 >> >> >> >> 0.364077 >> >> >> >> 1.76391 >> >> >> >> 1.90182 >> >> >> >> 0.017174 >> >> >> >> 0.011999 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Charts can be view here(http://img42.com/ziwjP+) and >> (http://img42.com/LKhoo+) >> >> >> From above, I'm feeling relieved that the LevelDB backend isn't >> useless. Most of metrics are better and if increasing cache size for >> LevelDB the results may be more attractive. >> Even more, LevelDB backend is used by "KeyValueStore" and much of >> optimizations can be done to improve performance such as increase >> parallel threads or optimize io path. >> >> Next, I use "rbd bench-write" to test. The result is pity: >> >> *RBD Bench-Write* >> >> >> >> *OPS/sec* >> >> >> >> *Bytes/sec* >> >> *KVStore* >> >> >> >> *FileStore* >> >> >> >> *KVStore* >> >> >> >> *FileStore* >> >> *Seq 4096 5* >> >> >> >> 27.42 >> >> >> >> 716.55 >> >> >> >> 111861.51 >> >> >> >> 2492149.21 >> >> *Rand 4096 5* >> >> >> >> >> 28.27 >> >> >> >> 504 >> >> >> >> 112331.42 >> >> >> >> 1683151.29 >> >> >> Just because kv backend doesn't support read/write operation with >> offset/length argument, each read/write operation will call a additional >> read LevelDB api to do. Much of time is consumed by reading entire large >> object in rbd situation. There exists some ways to change such as split >> large object to multi small objects or save metadata to avoid read >> arduous operation. >> >> As sage mentioned in <osd: new key/value >> backend>(http://wiki.ceph.com/index.php?title=01Planning/02Blueprints/Firefly/osd:_new_key%2F%2Fvalue_backend), >> more kv backends can be added now and I look forward to more people >> interested it. I think radosgw situation can fit in kv store in short ti >> >> -- >> >> Best Regards, >> >> Wheat >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> >> >> -- >> Best Regards, >> >> Wheat >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
