Hello Mark, Thanks for getting back to me. We do have a couple of vms running that were migrated off xen that are fine, performance in rados bench is what one would expect (maxing the 4xgigabit bond). The only other time I've noticed similar issues is when running mkfs.ext[3-4] on new images, which took ridiculously long on xen-pv and kvm and even longer under esxi. We have a vmfs image with configuration files for the guests and are trying to wget an iso into the shared config volume to install another vm via esxi we don't get very far (we checked the uplink etc and everything up to the way vmfs works on top of ceph seems ok). My thoughts are something in the way vmfs thin-provisions space is causing problems with ceph's own thin provisioning, my colleague is testing different block sizes, no luck however in getting any sort of improvement so far. And yes it we are using iscsi via tgtd from the ceph-extras repo I believe (in response to a message I just noticed come in while I was typing) Regards, Maciej Bonin Systems Engineer | M247 Limited M247.com Connected with our Customers Contact us today to discuss your hosting and connectivity requirements ISO 27001 | ISO 9001 | Deloitte Technology Fast 50 | Deloitte Technology Fast 500 EMEA | Sunday Times Tech Track 100 M247 Ltd, registered in England & Wales #4968341. 1 Ball Green, Cobra Court, Manchester, M32 0QT ISO 27001 Data Protection Classification: A - Public -----Original Message----- From: ceph-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ceph-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mark Nelson Sent: 04 February 2014 18:11 To: ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Performance issues running vmfs on top of Ceph On 02/04/2014 11:55 AM, Maciej Bonin wrote: > Hello guys, > > We're testing running an esxi hv on top of a ceph backend and we're getting abysmal performance when using vmfs, has anyone else tried this successful, any advice ? > Would be really thankful for any hints. Hi! I don't have a ton of experience with esxi, but if you can do some rados bench or smalliobenchfs tests, that might help give you an idea if the problem is Ceph (or lower), or more related to something higher up closer to exsi. Can you describe a little more what you are seeing and what you expect? Thanks, Mark > > Regards, > Maciej Bonin > Systems Engineer | M247 Limited > M247.com Connected with our Customers Contact us today to discuss > your hosting and connectivity requirements ISO 27001 | ISO 9001 | > Deloitte Technology Fast 50 | Deloitte Technology Fast 500 EMEA | > Sunday Times Tech Track 100 > M247 Ltd, registered in England & Wales #4968341. 1 Ball Green, Cobra > Court, Manchester, M32 0QT > > ISO 27001 Data Protection Classification: A - Public > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |