On 20 December 2015 at 08:35, Francois Lafont <flafdivers@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Hello,
On 18/12/2015 23:26, Don Waterloo wrote:
> rbd -p mypool create speed-test-image --size 1000
> rbd -p mypool bench-write speed-test-image
>
> I get
>
> bench-write io_size 4096 io_threads 16 bytes 1073741824 pattern seq
> SEC OPS OPS/SEC BYTES/SEC
> 1 79053 79070.82 323874082.50
> 2 144340 72178.81 295644410.60
> 3 221975 73997.57 303094057.34
> elapsed: 10 ops: 262144 ops/sec: 26129.32 bytes/sec: 107025708.32
>
> which is *much* faster than the cephfs.
Me too, I have better performance with rbd (~1400 iops with the fio command
in my first message instead of ~575 iops with the same fio command and cephfs).
I did a bit more work on this.
On cephfs-fuse, I get ~700 iops.
On cephfs kernel, I get ~120 iops.
These were both on 4.3 kernel
So i backed up to 3.16 kernel on the client. And observed the same results.
So ~20K iops w/ rbd, ~120iops w/ cephfs.
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
