Re: Ceph block storage - block.db useless?

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

 



Our default of 4 256MB WAL buffers is arguably already too big. On one hand we are making these buffers large to hopefully avoid short lived data going into the DB (pglog writes).  IE if a pglog write comes in and later a tombstone invalidating it comes in, we really want those to land in the same WAL log to avoid that write being propagated into the DB.  On the flip side, large buffers mean that there's more work that rocksdb has to perform to compare keys to get everything ordered.  This is done in the kv_sync_thread where we often bottleneck on small random write workloads:


        | | |   |   |   | + 13.30% rocksdb::InlineSkipList<rocksdb::MemTableRep::KeyComparator const&>::Insert<false>

So on one hand we want large buffers to avoid short lived data going into the DB, and on the other hand we want small buffers to avoid large amounts of comparisons eating CPU, especially in CPU limited environments.


Mark



On 3/12/19 8:25 AM, Benjamin Zapiec wrote:
May I configure the size of WAL to increase block.db usage?
For example I configure 20GB I would get an usage of about 48GB on L3.

Or should I stay with ceph defaults?
Is there a maximal size for WAL that makes sense?


_______________________________________________
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