Re: Inherited CEPH nightmare

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

 



> I've changed some elements of the config now and the results are much better but still quite poor relative to what I would consider normal SSD performance.
 The number of PGs has been increased from 128 to 256.  Not yet run JJ Balancer.
> In terms of performance, I measured the time it takes for ProxMox to clone a 127GB VM. It now clones in around 18 minutes, rather than 1 hour 55 mins before the config changes, so there is progress here.
> Any other suggestions are welcome.
> root@cl1-h1-lv:~# ceph osd df
> ID  CLASS  WEIGHT   REWEIGHT  SIZE     RAW USE  DATA     OMAP      META     AVAIL    %USE   VAR   PGS  STATUS
>  4    ssd  0.90970   1.00000  932 GiB  635 GiB  632 GiB   1.1 MiB  2.5 GiB  297 GiB  68.12  1.03   79      up
>  9    ssd  0.90970   1.00000  932 GiB  643 GiB  640 GiB    62 MiB  2.1 GiB  289 GiB  68.98  1.05   81      up

It would be possible (and perhaps improve a slight bit more) to allow
even more PGs to the large pools, you have around 80 PGs per OSD now,
and between 100-200 is supposed to be an ok figure, given all pools,
so if you are at ~80 now with 256 PGs on the main pool, you could bump
it to 512 unless you plan to add lots more pools later without
expanding the amount of OSDs.

Not a huge win, but more "placing it at the middle of the comfort
zone" in terms of "slightly faster scrubs", "spread work around
several OSDs when one large operation is requested" and so on.

-- 
May the most significant bit of your life be positive.
_______________________________________________
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