Re: [performance] rbd kernel module versus qemu librbd

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

 



>>But, anyway, from my test, the configuration impact less for the performance.

A fast speed win, disable cephx and debug:

[global] 
auth_cluster_required = none
auth_service_required = none
auth_client_required = none

debug_lockdep = 0/0
debug_context = 0/0
debug_crush = 0/0
debug_buffer = 0/0
debug_timer = 0/0
debug_journaler = 0/0
debug_osd = 0/0
debug_optracker = 0/0
debug_objclass = 0/0
debug_filestore = 0/0
debug_journal = 0/0
debug_ms = 0/0
debug_monc = 0/0
debug_tp = 0/0
debug_auth = 0/0
debug_finisher = 0/0
debug_heartbeatmap = 0/0
debug_perfcounter = 0/0
debug_asok = 0/0
debug_throttle = 0/0



----- Mail original -----
De: hzwulibin@xxxxxxxxx
À: "aderumier" <aderumier@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "ceph-users" <ceph-users@xxxxxxxx>
Envoyé: Mercredi 21 Octobre 2015 11:20:09
Objet: Re: Re:  [performance] rbd kernel module versus qemu librbd

Hi, 
Yeah, i have the ceph.conf on the real machine which VM located on. 
A simple configuration, -:) 
[global] 
fsid = *** 
mon_initial_members = *, *, * 
mon_host = *, *, * 
auth_cluster_required = cephx 
auth_service_required = cephx 
auth_client_required = cephx 
filestore_xattr_use_omap = true 

I change the configuration on line, let me post it: 
"journal_queue_max_ops": "3000", 
"journal_queue_max_bytes": "1048576000", 
"journal_max_corrupt_search": "10485760", 
"journal_max_write_bytes": "1048576000", 
"journal_max_write_entries": "1000", 
"filestore_queue_max_ops": "500", 
"filestore_queue_max_bytes": "104857600", 
"filestore_queue_committing_max_ops": "5000", 
"filestore_queue_committing_max_bytes": "1048576000", 
"filestore_max_inline_xattr_size": "254", 
"filestore_max_inline_xattr_size_xfs": "65536", 
"filestore_max_inline_xattr_size_btrfs": "2048", 
"filestore_max_inline_xattr_size_other": "512", 
"filestore_max_inline_xattrs": "6", 
"filestore_max_inline_xattrs_xfs": "10", 
"filestore_max_inline_xattrs_btrfs": "10", 
"filestore_max_inline_xattrs_other": "2", 
"filestore_max_alloc_hint_size": "1048576", 
"filestore_max_sync_interval": "10", 
"osd_op_num_shards": "10", 

But, anyway, from my test, the configuration impact less for the performance. 

Btw, ceph version, 0.94.3 hammer 
Thanks! 

hzwulibin@xxxxxxxxx 



From: Alexandre DERUMIER 
Date: 2015-10-21 17:12 
To: hzwulibin 
CC: ceph-users 
Subject: Re:  [performance] rbd kernel module versus qemu librbd 
can you send me also your ceph.conf ? 
do you have a ceph.conf on the vms hosts too ? 
----- Mail original ----- 
De: hzwulibin@xxxxxxxxx 
À: "aderumier" <aderumier@xxxxxxxxx> 
Cc: "ceph-users" <ceph-users@xxxxxxxx> 
Envoyé: Mercredi 21 Octobre 2015 10:31:56 
Objet: Re:  [performance] rbd kernel module versus qemu librbd 
Hi, 
let me post the version and configuration here first. 
host os: debian 7.8 kernel: 3.10.45 
guest os: debian 7.8 kernel: 3.2.0-4 
qemu version: 
ii ipxe-qemu 1.0.0+git-20131111.c3d1e78-2.1~bpo70+1 all PXE boot firmware - ROM images for qemu 
ii qemu-kvm 1:2.1+dfsg-12~bpo70+1 amd64 QEMU Full virtualization on x86 hardware 
ii qemu-system-common 1:2.1+dfsg-12~bpo70+1 amd64 QEMU full system emulation binaries (common files) 
ii qemu-system-x86 1:2.1+dfsg-12~bpo70+1 amd64 QEMU full system emulation binaries (x86) 
ii qemu-utils 1:2.1+dfsg-12~bpo70+1 amd64 QEMU utilities 
vm config: 
<disk type='network' device='disk'> 
<driver name='qemu' type='raw' cache='none'/> 
<auth username='cinder'> 
<secret type='ceph' uuid='****'/> 
</auth> 
<source protocol='rbd' name='*****'> 
<host name='***' port='6789'/> 
<host name='***' port='6789'/> 
<host name='***' port='6789'/> 
</source> 
<target dev='vdf' bus='virtio'/> 
<serial>*******</serial> 
<address type='pci' domain='0x0000' bus='0x00' slot='0x1d' function='0x0'/> 
</disk> 
Thanks! 
hzwulibin@xxxxxxxxx 
From: Alexandre DERUMIER 
Date: 2015-10-21 14:01 
To: hzwulibin 
CC: ceph-users 
Subject: Re:  [performance] rbd kernel module versus qemu librbd 
Damn, that's a huge difference. 
What is your host os, guest os , qemu version and vm config ? 
As an extra boost, you could enable iothread on virtio disk. 
(It's available on libvirt but not on openstack yet). 
If it's a test server, maybe could you test it with proxmox 4.0 hypervisor 
https://www.proxmox.com 
I have made a lot of patch inside it to optimize rbd (qemu+jemalloc, iothreads,...) 
----- Mail original ----- 
De: hzwulibin@xxxxxxxxx 
À: "aderumier" <aderumier@xxxxxxxxx> 
Cc: "ceph-users" <ceph-users@xxxxxxxx> 
Envoyé: Mercredi 21 Octobre 2015 06:11:20 
Objet: Re: Re:  [performance] rbd kernel module versus qemu librbd 
Hi, 
Thanks for you reply. 
I do more test here and things change more strange, now i only could get about 4k iops in VM: 
1. use fio with ioengine rbd to test the volume on the real machine 
[global] 
ioengine=rbd 
clientname=admin 
pool=vol_ssd 
rbdname=volume-4f4f9789-4215-4384-8e65-127a2e61a47f 
rw=randwrite 
bs=4k 
group_reporting=1 
[rbd_iodepth32] 
iodepth=32 
[rbd_iodepth1] 
iodepth=32 
[rbd_iodepth28] 
iodepth=32 
[rbd_iodepth8] 
iodepth=32 
could achive about 18k iops. 
2. test the same volume in VM, achive about 4.3k iops 
[global] 
rw=randwrite 
bs=4k 
ioengine=libaio 
#ioengine=sync 
iodepth=128 
direct=1 
group_reporting=1 
thread=1 
filename=/dev/vdb 
[task1] 
iodepth=32 
[task2] 
iodepth=32 
[task3] 
iodepth=32 
[task4] 
iodepth=32 
Using cep osd perf to check the osd latency, all less than 1 ms. 
Using iostat to check the osd %util, about 10 in case 2 test. 
Using dstat to check VM status: 
----total-cpu-usage---- -dsk/total- -net/total- ---paging-- ---system-- 
usr sys idl wai hiq siq| read writ| recv send| in out | int csw 
2 4 51 43 0 0| 0 17M| 997B 3733B| 0 0 |3476 6997 
2 5 51 43 0 0| 0 18M| 714B 4335B| 0 0 |3439 6915 
2 5 50 43 0 0| 0 17M| 594B 3150B| 0 0 |3294 6617 
1 3 52 44 0 0| 0 18M| 648B 3726B| 0 0 |3447 6991 
1 5 51 43 0 0| 0 18M| 582B 3208B| 0 0 |3467 7061 
Finally, using iptraf to check the package size in the VM, almost packages's 
size are around 1 to 70 and 71 to 140 bytes. That's different from real machine. 
But maybe iptraf on the VM can't prove anything, i check the real machine which the VM located on. 
It seems no abnormal. 
BTW, my VM is located on the ceph storage node. 
Anyone can give me more sugestions? 
Thanks! 
hzwulibin@xxxxxxxxx 
From: Alexandre DERUMIER 
Date: 2015-10-20 19:36 
To: hzwulibin 
CC: ceph-users 
Subject: Re:  [performance] rbd kernel module versus qemu librbd 
Hi, 
I'm able to reach around same performance with qemu-librbd vs qemu-krbd, 
when I compile qemu with jemalloc 
(http://git.qemu.org/?p=qemu.git;a=commit;h=7b01cb974f1093885c40bf4d0d3e78e27e531363) 
on my test, librbd with jemalloc still use 2x more cpu than krbd, 
so cpu could be bottleneck too. 
with fasts cpu (3.1ghz), I'm able to reach around 70k iops 4k with rbd volume, both with krbd or librbd 
----- Mail original ----- 
De: hzwulibin@xxxxxxxxx 
À: "ceph-users" <ceph-users@xxxxxxxx> 
Envoyé: Mardi 20 Octobre 2015 10:22:33 
Objet:  [performance] rbd kernel module versus qemu librbd 
Hi, 
I have a question about the IOPS performance for real machine and virtual machine. 
Here is my test situation: 
1. ssd pool (9 OSD servers with 2 osds on each server, 10Gb networks for public & cluster networks) 
2. volume1: use rbd create a 100G volume from the ssd pool and map to the real machine 
3. volume2: use cinder create a 100G volume form the ssd pool and atach to a guest host 
4. disable rbd cache 
5. fio test on the two volues: 
[global] 
rw=randwrite 
bs=4k 
ioengine=libaio 
iodepth=64 
direct=1 
size=64g 
runtime=300s 
group_reporting=1 
thread=1 
volume1 got about 24k IOPS and volume got about 14k IOPS. 
We could see performance of volume2 is not good compare to volume1, so is it normal behabior of guest host? 
If not, what maybe the problem? 
Thanks! 
hzwulibin@xxxxxxxxx 
_______________________________________________ 
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




[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