Re: CephFS - Small file - single thread - read performance.

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

 



 

[@test]# time cat 50b.img > /dev/null

real    0m0.004s
user    0m0.000s
sys     0m0.002s
[@test]# time cat 50b.img > /dev/null

real    0m0.002s
user    0m0.000s
sys     0m0.002s
[@test]# time cat 50b.img > /dev/null

real    0m0.002s
user    0m0.000s
sys     0m0.001s
[@test]# time cat 50b.img > /dev/null

real    0m0.002s
user    0m0.001s
sys     0m0.001s
[@test]#

Luminous, centos7.6 kernel cephfs mount, 10Gbit, ssd meta, hdd data, mds 
2,2Ghz



-----Original Message-----
From: Alexandre DERUMIER [mailto:aderumier@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: 18 January 2019 15:37
To: Burkhard Linke
Cc: ceph-users
Subject: Re:  CephFS - Small file - single thread - read 
performance.

Hi,
I don't have so big latencies:

# time cat 50bytesfile > /dev/null

real	0m0,002s
user	0m0,001s
sys	0m0,000s


(It's on an ceph ssd cluster (mimic), kernel cephfs client (4.18), 10GB 
network with small latency too, client/server have 3ghz cpus)



----- Mail original -----
De: "Burkhard Linke" <Burkhard.Linke@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
À: "ceph-users" <ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Envoyé: Vendredi 18 Janvier 2019 15:29:45
Objet: Re:  CephFS - Small file - single thread - read 
performance.

Hi, 

On 1/18/19 3:11 PM, jesper@xxxxxxxx wrote: 
> Hi. 
> 
> We have the intention of using CephFS for some of our shares, which 
> we'd like to spool to tape as a part normal backup schedule. CephFS 
> works nice for large files but for "small" .. < 0.1MB .. there seem to 

> be a "overhead" on 20-40ms per file. I tested like this:
> 
> root@abe:/nfs/home/jk# time cat /ceph/cluster/rsyncbackups/13kbfile > 
> /dev/null
> 
> real 0m0.034s
> user 0m0.001s
> sys 0m0.000s
> 
> And from local page-cache right after. 
> root@abe:/nfs/home/jk# time cat /ceph/cluster/rsyncbackups/13kbfile > 
> /dev/null
> 
> real 0m0.002s
> user 0m0.002s
> sys 0m0.000s
> 
> Giving a ~20ms overhead in a single file. 
> 
> This is about x3 higher than on our local filesystems (xfs) based on 
> same spindles.
> 
> CephFS metadata is on SSD - everything else on big-slow HDD's (in both 

> cases).
> 
> Is this what everyone else see? 


Each file access on client side requires the acquisition of a 
corresponding locking entity ('file capability') from the MDS. This adds 
an extra network round trip to the MDS. In the worst case the MDS needs 
to request a capability release from another client which still holds 
the cap (e.g. file is still in page cache), adding another extra network 
round trip. 


CephFS is not NFS, and has a strong consistency model. This comes at a 
price. 


Regards, 

Burkhard 


_______________________________________________ 
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


_______________________________________________
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