回复: Re: Ask a performance question for the RGW

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

 



I know FileStore.ondisk_finisher handle C_OSD_OpCommit , and from "journaled_completion_queue" to "op_commit" cost 3.6 seconds, maybe cost in the function of ReplicatedPG::op_commit .
 Through OpTracker , I find that ReplicatedPG::op_commit first lock pg, but it sometimes cost from 0.5  to 1 second , so the whole ondisk_finisher must wait 1 second. How can cancel pg lock in the
ReplicatedPG::op_commit ?
thanks



baijiaruo at 126.com

???? Guang Yang
????? 2014-07-01 11:39
???? baijiaruo
??? ceph-users
??? Re: [ceph-users] Ask a performance question for the RGW
On Jun 30, 2014, at 3:59 PM, baijiaruo at 126.com wrote:

> Hello,
> thanks for you answer the question.
> But when there are less than 50 thousand objects, and latency is very big . I see the write ops for the bucket index object.? from "journaled_completion_queue" to "op_commit"  cost 3.6 seconds?this mean that from ?writing journal finish? to  "op_commit" cost 3.6 seconds?
> so I can't understand this and what happened?
The operations updating the same bucket index object get serialized, one possibility is that those operation was hang there waiting other ops finishing their work.
>  
> thanks
> baijiaruo at 126.com
>  
> ???? Guang Yang
> ????? 2014-06-30 14:57
> ???? baijiaruo
> ??? ceph-users
> ??? Re: [ceph-users] Ask a performance question for the RGW
> Hello,
> There is a known limitation of bucket scalability, and there is a blueprint tracking it - https://wiki.ceph.com/Planning/Blueprints/Submissions/rgw%3A_bucket_index_scalability.
>  
> At time being, I would recommend to do sharding at application level (create multiple buckets) to workaround this limitation.
>  
> Thanks,
> Guang
>  
> On Jun 30, 2014, at 2:54 PM, baijiaruo at 126.com wrote:
>  
> > 
> > hello, everyone!
> > 
> > when I user rest bench test RGW performance and the cmd is:
> > ./rest-bench --access-key=ak --secret=sk --bucket=bucket_name --seconds=600 -t 200 -b 524288 -no-cleanup write
> > 
> > test result:
> > Total time run: 362.962324 T
> > otal writes made: 48189
> > Write size: 524288
> > Bandwidth (MB/sec): 66.383
> > Stddev Bandwidth: 40.7776
> > Max bandwidth (MB/sec): 173
> > Min bandwidth (MB/sec): 0
> > Average Latency: 1.50435
> > Stddev Latency: 0.910731
> > Max latency: 9.12276
> > Min latency: 0.19867
> > 
> > my environment is 4 host and 40 disk?osd?? but test result is very bad? average latency is 1.5 seconds ?and I find write obj metadate is very slowly?because it puts so many object to one bucket? we know writing object metadate can call method ?bucket_prepare_op?,and test find this op is very slowly? I find the osd which contain bucket-obj?and see the ?bucket_prepare_op?by dump_historic_ops :
> > { "description": "osd_op(client.4742.0:87613 .dir.default.4243.3 [call rgw.bucket_prepare_op] 3.3670fe74 e317)",
> >           "received_at": "2014-06-30 13:35:55.409597",
> >           "age": "51.148026",
> >           "duration": "4.130137",
> >           "type_data": [
> >                 "commit sent; apply or cleanup",
> >                 { "client": "client.4742",
> >                   "tid": 87613},
> >                 [
> >                     { "time": "2014-06-30 13:35:55.409660",
> >                       "event": "waiting_for_osdmap"},
> >                     { "time": "2014-06-30 13:35:55.409669",
> >                       "event": "queue op_wq"},
> >                     { "time": "2014-06-30 13:35:55.896766",
> >                       "event": "reached_pg"},
> >                     { "time": "2014-06-30 13:35:55.896793",
> >                       "event": "started"},
> >                     { "time": "2014-06-30 13:35:55.896796",
> >                       "event": "started"},
> >                     { "time": "2014-06-30 13:35:55.899450",
> >                       "event": "waiting for subops from [40,43]"},
> >                     { "time": "2014-06-30 13:35:55.899757",
> >                       "event": "commit_queued_for_journal_write"},
> >                     { "time": "2014-06-30 13:35:55.899799",
> >                       "event": "write_thread_in_journal_buffer"},
> >                     { "time": "2014-06-30 13:35:55.899910",
> >                       "event": "journaled_completion_queued"},
> >                     { "time": "2014-06-30 13:35:55.899936",
> >                       "event": "journal first callback"},
> >                     { "time": "2014-06-30 13:35:55.899944",
> >                       "event": "queuing ondisk"},
> >                     { "time": "2014-06-30 13:35:56.142104",
> >                       "event": "sub_op_commit_rec"},
> >                     { "time": "2014-06-30 13:35:56.176950",
> >                       "event": "sub_op_commit_rec"},
> >                     { "time": "2014-06-30 13:35:59.535301",
> >                       "event": "op_commit"},
> >                     { "time": "2014-06-30 13:35:59.535331",
> >                       "event": "commit_sent"},
> >                     { "time": "2014-06-30 13:35:59.539723",
> >                       "event": "op_applied"},
> >                     { "time": "2014-06-30 13:35:59.539734",
> >                       "event": "done"}]]},
> > 
> > so why from "journaled_completion_queued" to "op_commit" is very slowly, and what happened?
> > thanks
> > 
> > baijiaruo at 126.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > ceph-users mailing list
> > ceph-users at lists.ceph.com
> > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ceph.com/pipermail/ceph-users-ceph.com/attachments/20140701/d4b3ed3c/attachment.htm>


[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