On 2020-01-13 14:36, Radoslaw Zarzynski wrote:
[skip]
(and I talk
about iops, because that's actually what matters for storage after
all).
This requires clarification. IOPS from single OSD instance or from
a set of HW? I think that all finally matters is return-on-investment.
Number of processes inside a box is an implementation detail.
I do not understand. I talk about simple comparison metric for any
storage application - IOPS. Since both storage applications
(legacy-osd,
crimson-osd) share absolutely the same Ceph spec - that is a fair
choice.
For example we do not compare replication protocols (strong consistency
vs eventual or weak consistency), or client driven replication vs
primary
copy replication. These parts in our comparison are the same. But what
we compare is how fast message is received and reply is sent back.
Nothing
more. So what else if not IOPS?
If I were a game developer I would probably choose fps :)
I just want to run a simple benchmark, which can show me a clear
difference in iops numbers between legacy and crimson osd.
Sure. Currently we have the `perf check bot` doing `scripts/run-cbt.sh`
on `crimson-osd` to hunt for regressions. However, deploying
environment might be a bit time-consuming, so I quickly & roughly
compared both OSD implementations in the old school way:
https://gist.github.com/rzarzynski/9f92f951c929d4a4ed9a7a13ff156b71
All commands all there. I would be grateful for verifying the results.
Here is my:
https://gist.github.com/rouming/dcdca2d6e23fa7ae9041bbda28efd2a1
legacy-osd: ~130MB/s
crimson-osd: ~120MB/s
BTW prefill writes are also corresponding to reads on my machine:
legacy-osd: 122MB/s
crimson-osd: 94MB/s
What other loads I can try?
--
Roman
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list -- dev@xxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave@xxxxxxx
