> On Jul 1, 2015, at 00:34, Dan van der Ster <dan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Yan, Zheng <zyan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> On Jun 30, 2015, at 15:37, Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 6:57 AM, Yan, Zheng <zyan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> I tried 4.1 kernel and 0.94.2 ceph-fuse. their performance are about the same. >>>> >>>> fuse: >>>> Files=191, Tests=1964, 60 wallclock secs ( 0.43 usr 0.08 sys + 1.16 cusr 0.65 csys = 2.32 CPU) >>>> >>>> kernel: >>>> Files=191, Tests=2286, 61 wallclock secs ( 0.45 usr 0.08 sys + 1.21 cusr 0.72 csys = 2.46 CPU) >>> >>> On Friday, I tried stock 3.10 vs 4.1 and they were about the same as >>> well (a few tests failed in 3.10 though). However Dan is using >>> 3.10.0-229.7.2.el7.x86_64, which is 3.10 with a lot of backports, so >>> it's not quite the same. Dan, are the numbers you are seeing >>> consistent? >>> >> >> I just tried 3.10.0-229.7.2.el7 kernel. it’s a little slower than 4.1 kernel >> >> 4.1: >> Files=191, Tests=2286, 61 wallclock secs ( 0.45 usr 0.07 sys + 1.24 cusr 0.76 csys = 2.52 CPU) >> >> 3.10.0-229.7.2.el7: >> Files=191, Tests=1964, 75 wallclock secs ( 0.45 usr 0.09 sys + 1.73 cusr 5.04 csys = 7.31 CPU) >> >> Dan, did you run the test on the same client machine. I think network latency affects run time of this test a lots >> > > All the tests run on the same client, but it seems there is some > variability in the tests. Now I get: > > Linux 3.10.0-229.7.2.el7.x86_64 > Files=184, Tests=1957, 91 wallclock secs ( 0.72 usr 0.19 sys + 5.68 > cusr 10.09 csys = 16.68 CPU) > > Linux 4.1.0-1.el7.elrepo.x86_64 > Files=184, Tests=1957, 84 wallclock secs ( 0.75 usr 0.44 sys + 5.17 > cusr 9.77 csys = 16.13 CPU) > > ceph-fuse 0.94.2: > Files=184, Tests=1957, 78 wallclock secs ( 0.69 usr 0.17 sys + 5.08 > cusr 9.93 csys = 15.87 CPU) > > > I don't know if it's related -- and maybe I misunderstood something > fundamental -- but we don't manage to get FUSE or the kernel client to > use the page cache: > > I have fuse_use_invalidate_cb = true then used fincore to see what's cached: > > # df -h . > Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on > ceph-fuse 444T 135T 309T 31% /cephfs > # cat zero > /dev/null > # linux-fincore zero > filename > size total_pages min_cached page > cached_pages cached_size cached_perc > -------- > ---- ----------- --------------- > ------------ ----------- ----------- > zero > 104,857,600 25,600 -1 > 0 0 0.00 > --- > total cached size: 0 > > The kernel client has the same behaviour. Is this expected? yes. PJD only tests metadata operations. page cache is not involved in these operations. Regards Yan, Zheng > > Cheers, Dan _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |