-Scheduler {noop or
deadline } :- noop
-No read ahead! :- yes
-No RAID! :- Yes no RAID
-Make sure the
kernel seems them as SSDs :- Yes
Hi Ben,Yes...i am using 2*10G (Bonding LACP)...[root@cpu02 ~]# /usr/bin/iperf3 -c 10.10.0.10
Connecting to host 10.10.0.10, port 5201
[ 4] local 10.10.0.11 port 45135 connected to 10.10.0.10 port 5201
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr Cwnd
[ 4] 0.00-1.00 sec 1.15 GBytes 9.85 Gbits/sec 13 1.30 MBytes
[ 4] 1.00-2.00 sec 1.15 GBytes 9.91 Gbits/sec 0 1.89 MBytes
[ 4] 2.00-3.00 sec 1.15 GBytes 9.90 Gbits/sec 0 2.33 MBytes
[ 4] 3.00-4.00 sec 1.15 GBytes 9.89 Gbits/sec 1 2.41 MBytes
[ 4] 4.00-5.00 sec 1.15 GBytes 9.90 Gbits/sec 0 2.42 MBytes
[ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 1.15 GBytes 9.90 Gbits/sec 0 2.53 MBytes
[ 4] 6.00-7.00 sec 1.15 GBytes 9.90 Gbits/sec 1 2.53 MBytes
[ 4] 7.00-8.00 sec 1.15 GBytes 9.90 Gbits/sec 0 2.68 MBytes
[ 4] 8.00-9.00 sec 1.15 GBytes 9.90 Gbits/sec 0 2.76 MBytes
[ 4] 9.00-10.00 sec 1.15 GBytes 9.90 Gbits/sec 0 2.88 MBytes
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr
[ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 11.5 GBytes 9.89 Gbits/sec 15 sender
[ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 11.5 GBytes 9.89 Gbits/sec receiver
[root@cpu01 ~]# time `dd if=/dev/zero of=/rhev/data-center/mnt/glusterSD/10.10.0.14\:_ds01/myfile bs=1024k count=1000; sync`
1000+0 records in
1000+0 records out
1048576000 bytes (1.0 GB) copied, 2.70556 s, 388 MB/s
real 0m2.815s
user 0m0.002s
sys 0m0.822s
[root@cpu01 ~]# time `dd if=/dev/zero of=/rhev/data-center/mnt/glusterSD/10.10.0.14\:_ds01/e732a82f-bae9-4368-8b98-dedc1c3814de/images/myfile bs=1024k count=1000; sync`
1000+0 records in
1000+0 records out
1048576000 bytes (1.0 GB) copied, 1.93056 s, 543 MB/s
real 0m2.077s
user 0m0.002s
sys 0m0.795s
[root@cpu01 ~]#
Ban@ how i will check those things :-
A couple things to check with your SSDs:
-Scheduler {noop or deadline }
-No read ahead!
-No RAID!
-Make sure the kernel seems them as SSDs
Thanks,
Punit
On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 2:55 AM, Ben Turner <bturner@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:This is slow for the env you described. Are you sure you are using your 10G NICs? What do you see with iperf between the client and server? In my env with 12 spinning disks in a RAID 6 + single 10G NIC I get:----- Original Message -----
> From: "Vijay Bellur" <vbellur@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "Punit Dambiwal" <hypunit@xxxxxxxxx>, gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2015 6:44:42 AM
> Subject: Re: Glusterfs performance tweaks
>
> On 04/08/2015 02:57 PM, Punit Dambiwal wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am getting very slow throughput in the glusterfs (dead slow...even
> > SATA is better) ... i am using all SSD in my environment.....
> >
> > I have the following setup :-
> > A. 4* host machine with Centos 7(Glusterfs 3.6.2 | Distributed
> > Replicated | replica=2)
> > B. Each server has 24 SSD as bricks…(Without HW Raid | JBOD)
> > C. Each server has 2 Additional ssd for OS…
> > D. Network 2*10G with bonding…(2*E5 CPU and 64GB RAM)
> >
> > Note :- Performance/Throughput slower then Normal SATA 7200 RPM…even i
> > am using all SSD in my ENV..
> >
> > Gluster Volume options :-
> >
> > +++++++++++++++
> > Options Reconfigured:
> > performance.nfs.write-behind-window-size: 1024MB
> > performance.io-thread-count: 32
> > performance.cache-size: 1024MB
> > cluster.quorum-type: auto
> > cluster.server-quorum-type: server
> > diagnostics.count-fop-hits: on
> > diagnostics.latency-measurement: on
> > nfs.disable: on
> > user.cifs: enable
> > auth.allow: *
> > performance.quick-read: off
> > performance.read-ahead: off
> > performance.io-cache: off
> > performance.stat-prefetch: off
> > cluster.eager-lock: enable
> > network.remote-dio: enable
> > storage.owner-uid: 36
> > storage.owner-gid: 36
> > server.allow-insecure: on
> > network.ping-timeout: 0
> > diagnostics.brick-log-level: INFO
> > +++++++++++++++++++
> >
> > Test with SATA and Glusterfs SSD….
> > ———————
> > Dell EQL (SATA disk 7200 RPM)
> > —-
> > [root@mirror ~]#
> > 4096+0 records in
> > 4096+0 records out
> > 268435456 bytes (268 MB) copied, 20.7763 s, 12.9 MB/s
> > [root@mirror ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=4k oflag=dsync
> > 4096+0 records in
> > 4096+0 records out
> > 268435456 bytes (268 MB) copied, 23.5947 s, 11.4 MB/s
> >
> > GlsuterFS SSD
> > —
> > [root@sv-VPN1 ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=4k oflag=dsync
> > 4096+0 records in
> > 4096+0 records out
> > 268435456 bytes (268 MB) copied, 66.2572 s, 4.1 MB/s
> > [root@sv-VPN1 ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=4k oflag=dsync
> > 4096+0 records in
> > 4096+0 records out
> > 268435456 bytes (268 MB) copied, 62.6922 s, 4.3 MB/s
> > ————————
> >
> > Please let me know what i should do to improve the performance of my
> > glusterfs…
>
>
> What is the throughput that you get when you run these commands on the
> disks directly without gluster in the picture?
>
> By running dd with dsync you are ensuring that there is no buffering
> anywhere in the stack and that is the reason why low throughput is being
> observed.
[root@gqac025 gluster-mount]# dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=4k oflag=dsync
4096+0 records in
4096+0 records out
268435456 bytes (268 MB) copied, 9.88752 s, 27.1 MB/s
A couple things to check with your SSDs:
-Scheduler {noop or deadline }
-No read ahead!
-No RAID!
-Make sure the kernel seems them as SSDs
As Vijay said you will see WAY better throughput if you get rid of the dsync flag. Maybe try something like:
$ time `dd if=/dev/zero of=/gluster-mount/myfile bs=1024k count=1000; sync`
That will give you an idea of what it takes to write to RAM then sync the dirty pages to disk.
-b
> -Vijay
>
> -Vijay
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
