Re: post - bluestore default vs tuned performance comparison

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

 



I believe they were chosen based on a 3rd party recommendation. I would suggest carefully considering each of those options and what they do before blindly using them.


Mark


On 7/8/20 3:30 PM, Frank Ritchie wrote:
Hi,

For this post:

https://ceph.io/community/bluestore-default-vs-tuned-performance-comparison/

I don't see a way to contact the authors so I thought I would try here.

Does anyone know how the rocksdb tuning parameters of:

"
bluestore_rocksdb_options =
compression=kNoCompression,max_write_buffer_number=32,min_write_buffer_number_to_merge=2,recycle_log_file_num=32,compaction_style=kCompactionStyleLevel,write_buffer_size=67108864,target_file_size_base=67108864,max_background_compactions=31,level0_file_num_compaction_trigger=8,level0_slowdown_writes_trigger=32,level0_stop_writes_trigger=64,max_bytes_for_level_base=536870912,compaction_threads=32,max_bytes_for_level_multiplier=8,flusher_threads=8,compaction_readahead_size=2MB
"

were chosen?

Some of the settings seem to not be in line with the rocksdb tuning guide:

https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/wiki/RocksDB-Tuning-Guide

thx
Frank
_______________________________________________
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



[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