Hi Christian, Wonder why are you saying EC will write more data than replication ? Anyways, as you suggested, I will see how can I measure WA for EC vs replication. Thanks & Regards Somnath -----Original Message----- From: Christian Balzer [mailto:chibi@xxxxxxx] Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 11:28 PM To: ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Cc: Somnath Roy; Loic Dachary (loic@xxxxxxxxxxx) Subject: Re: EC backend benchmark Hello, Could you have another EC run with differing block sizes like described here: http://lists.opennebula.org/pipermail/ceph-users-ceph.com/2014-October/043949.html and look for write amplification? I'd suspect that by the very nature of EC and the addition local checksums it (potentially) writes it to be worse than replication. Which is something very much to consider with SSDs. Christian On Mon, 11 May 2015 21:23:40 +0000 Somnath Roy wrote: > Hi Loic and community, > > I have gathered the following data on EC backend (all flash). I have > decided to use Jerasure since space saving is the utmost priority. > > Setup: > -------- > 41 OSDs (each on 8 TB flash), 5 node Ceph cluster. 48 core HT enabled > cpu/64 GB RAM. Tested with Rados Bench clients. > > Result: > --------- > > It is attached in the doc. > > Summary : > ------------- > > 1. It is doing pretty good in Reads and 4 Rados Bench clients are > saturating 40 GB network. With more physical server, it is scaling > almost linearly and saturating 40 GbE on both the host. > > 2. As suspected with Ceph, problem is again with writes. Throughput > wise it is beating replicated pools in significant numbers. But, it is > not scaling with multiple clients and not saturating anything. > > So, my question is the following. > > 1. Probably, nothing to do with EC backend, we are suffering because > of filestore inefficiencies. Do you think any tunable like EC stipe > size (or anything else) will help here ? > > 2. I couldn't make fault domain as 'host', because of HW limitation. > Do you think will that play a role in performance for bigger k values ? > > 3. Even though it is not saturating 40 GbE for writes, do you think > separating out public/private network will help in terms of performance ? > > Any feedback on this is much appreciated. > > Thanks & Regards > Somnath > > > > ________________________________ > > PLEASE NOTE: The information contained in this electronic mail message > is intended only for the use of the designated recipient(s) named above. > If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are > hereby notified that you have received this message in error and that > any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is > strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, > please notify the sender by telephone or e-mail (as shown above) > immediately and destroy any and all copies of this message in your > possession (whether hard copies or electronically stored copies). > -- Christian Balzer Network/Systems Engineer chibi@xxxxxxx Global OnLine Japan/Fusion Communications http://www.gol.com/ ________________________________ PLEASE NOTE: The information contained in this electronic mail message is intended only for the use of the designated recipient(s) named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this message in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender by telephone or e-mail (as shown above) immediately and destroy any and all copies of this message in your possession (whether hard copies or electronically stored copies). _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |