|
Actually this may not work if moving from a local datastore to
Ceph. For iSCSI xcopy, both the source and destination need to be
accessible by the target such as in moving vms across Ceph
datastores. So in your case, vmotion will be handled by VMWare
data mover which uses 64K block sizes.
On 25/10/2019 10:28, Maged Mokhtar
wrote:
For vmotion speed, check "emulate_3pc" attribute on the LIO
target. If 0 (default), VMWare will issue io in 64KB blocks
which gives low speed. if set to 1 this will trigger VMWare to
use vaai extended copy, which activates LIO's xcopy
functionality which uses 512KB block sizes by default. We also
bumped the xcopy block size to 4M (rbd object size) which gives
around 400 MB/s vmotion speed, the same speed can also be
achieved via Veeam backups.
/Maged
On 25/10/2019 06:47, Ryan wrote:
I'm using CentOS 7.7.1908 with kernel
3.10.0-1062.1.2.el7.x86_64. The workload was a VMware
Storage Motion from a local SSD backed datastore to the ceph
backed datastore. Performance was measured using dstat on
the iscsi gateway for network traffic and ceph status as
this cluster is basically idle. I changed max_data_area_mb
to 256 and cmdsn_depth to 128. This appears to have given a
slight improvement of maybe 10MB/s.
Moving VM to the ceph backed datastore
io:
client: 124 KiB/s rd, 76 MiB/s wr, 95 op/s rd, 1.26k
op/s wr
Moving VM off the ceph backed datastore
io:
client: 344 MiB/s rd, 625 KiB/s wr, 5.54k op/s rd, 62
op/s wr
I'm going to test bonnie++ with an rbd volume mounted
directly on the iscsi gateway. Also will test bonnie++
inside a VM on a ceph backed datastore.
On 10/24/2019 12:22 PM, Ryan
wrote:
> I'm in the process of testing the iscsi target
feature of ceph. The
> cluster is running ceph 14.2.4 and ceph-iscsi 3.3. It
consists of 5
What kernel are you using?
> hosts with 12 SSD OSDs per host. Some basic testing
moving VMs to a ceph
> backed datastore is only showing 60MB/s transfers.
However moving these
> back off the datastore is fast at 200-300MB/s.
What is the workload and what are you using to measure the
throughput?
If you are using fio, what arguments are you using? And,
could you
change the ioengine to rbd and re-run the test from the
target system so
we can check if rbd is slow or iscsi?
For small IOs, 60 is about right.
For 128-512K IOs you should be able to get around 300 MB/s
for writes
and 600 for reads.
1. Increase max_data_area_mb. This is a kernel buffer
lio/tcmu uses to
pass data between the kernel and tcmu-runner. The default
is only 8MB.
In gwcli cd to your disk and do:
# reconfigure max_data_area_mb %N
where N is between 8 and 2048 MBs.
2. The Linux kernel target only allows 64 commands per
iscsi session by
default. We increase that to 128, but you can increase
this to 512.
In gwcli cd to the target dir and do
reconfigure cmdsn_depth 512
3. I think ceph-iscsi and lio work better with higher
queue depths so if
you are using fio you want higher numjobs and/or iodepths.
>
> What should I be looking at to track down the write
performance issue?
> In comparison with the Nimble Storage arrays I can
see 200-300MB/s in
> both directions.
>
> Thanks,
> Ryan
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx
>
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx
|
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx
