Re: rbd directory listing performance issues

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

 



Hello,

On Tue, 6 Jan 2015 15:29:50 +0000 Shain Miley wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> We currently have a 12 node (3 monitor+9 OSD) ceph cluster, made up of
> 107 x 4TB drives formatted with xfs. The cluster is running ceph version
> 0.80.7:
> 
I assume journals on the same HDD then.

How much memory per node?

[snip]
> 
> A while back I created an 80 TB rbd image to be used as an archive
> repository for some of our audio and video files. We are still seeing
> good rados and rbd read and write throughput performance, however we
> seem to be having quite a long delay in response times when we try to
> list out the files in directories with a large number of folders, files,
> etc.
> 
> Subsequent directory listing times seem to run a lot faster (but I am
> not sure for long that is the case before we see another instance of
> slowness), however the initial directory listings can take 20 to 45
> seconds.
> 

Basically the same thing(s) that Robert said.
How big is "large"?
How much memory on the machine you're mounting this image?
Ah, never mind, just saw your follow-up.

Definitely add memory to this machine if you can.

The initial listing is always going to be slow-ish of sorts depending on
a number of things in the cluster.

As in, how busy is it (IOPS)? With journals on disk your HDDs are going to
be sluggish individually and your directory information might reside
mostly in one object (on one OSD), thus limiting you to the speed of that
particular disk.

And this is also where the memory of your storage nodes comes in, if it is
large enough your "hot" objects will get cached there as well. 
To see if that's the case (at least temporarily), drop the caches on all
of your storage nodes (echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches), mount your
image, do the "ls -l" until it's "fast", umount it, mount it again and do
the listing again. 
In theory, unless your cluster is extremely busy or your storage node have
very little pagecache, the re-mounted image should get all the info it
needs from said pagecache on your storage nodes, never having to go to the
actual OSD disks and thus be fast(er) than the initial test.

Finally to potentially improve the initial scan that has to come from the
disks obviously, see how fragmented your OSDs are and depending on the
results defrag them.

Christian
-- 
Christian Balzer        Network/Systems Engineer                
chibi@xxxxxxx   	Global OnLine Japan/Fusion Communications
http://www.gol.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]     [Ceph Dev]     [Linux USB Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [xfs]


  Powered by Linux