Hi, Alexandre. Very good work! Do you have a rpm-file? Thanks.
2015-06-10 7:10 GMT+03:00 Alexandre DERUMIER <[email protected]>: > Hi, > > I have tested qemu with last tcmalloc 2.4, and the improvement is huge > with iothread: 50k iops (+45%) ! > > > > qemu : no iothread : glibc : iops=33395 > qemu : no-iothread : tcmalloc (2.2.1) : iops=34516 (+3%) > qemu : no-iothread : jemmaloc : iops=42226 (+26%) > qemu : no-iothread : tcmalloc (2.4) : iops=35974 (+7%) > > > qemu : iothread : glibc : iops=34516 > qemu : iothread : tcmalloc : iops=38676 (+12%) > qemu : iothread : jemmaloc : iops=28023 (-19%) > qemu : iothread : tcmalloc (2.4) : iops=50276 (+45%) > > > > > > qemu : iothread : tcmalloc (2.4) : iops=50276 (+45%) > ------------------------------------------------------ > rbd_iodepth32-test: (g=0): rw=randread, bs=4K-4K/4K-4K/4K-4K, > ioengine=libaio, iodepth=32 > fio-2.1.11 > Starting 1 process > Jobs: 1 (f=1): [r(1)] [100.0% done] [214.7MB/0KB/0KB /s] [54.1K/0/0 iops] > [eta 00m:00s] > rbd_iodepth32-test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=894: Wed Jun 10 > 05:54:24 2015 > read : io=5120.0MB, bw=201108KB/s, iops=50276, runt= 26070msec > slat (usec): min=1, max=1136, avg= 3.54, stdev= 3.58 > clat (usec): min=128, max=6262, avg=631.41, stdev=197.71 > lat (usec): min=149, max=6265, avg=635.27, stdev=197.40 > clat percentiles (usec): > | 1.00th=[ 318], 5.00th=[ 378], 10.00th=[ 418], 20.00th=[ 474], > | 30.00th=[ 516], 40.00th=[ 564], 50.00th=[ 612], 60.00th=[ 652], > | 70.00th=[ 700], 80.00th=[ 756], 90.00th=[ 860], 95.00th=[ 980], > | 99.00th=[ 1272], 99.50th=[ 1384], 99.90th=[ 1688], 99.95th=[ 1896], > | 99.99th=[ 3760] > bw (KB /s): min=145608, max=249688, per=100.00%, avg=201108.00, > stdev=21718.87 > lat (usec) : 250=0.04%, 500=25.84%, 750=53.00%, 1000=16.63% > lat (msec) : 2=4.46%, 4=0.03%, 10=0.01% > cpu : usr=9.73%, sys=24.93%, ctx=66417, majf=0, minf=38 > IO depths : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=100.0%, > >=64=0.0% > submit : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, > >=64=0.0% > complete : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.1%, 64=0.0%, > >=64=0.0% > issued : total=r=1310720/w=0/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0 > latency : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=32 > > Run status group 0 (all jobs): > READ: io=5120.0MB, aggrb=201107KB/s, minb=201107KB/s, maxb=201107KB/s, > mint=26070msec, maxt=26070msec > > Disk stats (read/write): > vdb: ios=1302555/0, merge=0/0, ticks=715176/0, in_queue=714840, > util=99.73% > > > > > > > rbd_iodepth32-test: (g=0): rw=randread, bs=4K-4K/4K-4K/4K-4K, > ioengine=libaio, iodepth=32 > fio-2.1.11 > Starting 1 process > Jobs: 1 (f=1): [r(1)] [100.0% done] [158.7MB/0KB/0KB /s] [40.6K/0/0 iops] > [eta 00m:00s] > rbd_iodepth32-test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=889: Wed Jun 10 > 06:05:06 2015 > read : io=5120.0MB, bw=143897KB/s, iops=35974, runt= 36435msec > slat (usec): min=1, max=710, avg= 3.31, stdev= 3.35 > clat (usec): min=191, max=4740, avg=884.66, stdev=315.65 > lat (usec): min=289, max=4743, avg=888.31, stdev=315.51 > clat percentiles (usec): > | 1.00th=[ 462], 5.00th=[ 516], 10.00th=[ 548], 20.00th=[ 596], > | 30.00th=[ 652], 40.00th=[ 764], 50.00th=[ 868], 60.00th=[ 940], > | 70.00th=[ 1004], 80.00th=[ 1096], 90.00th=[ 1256], 95.00th=[ 1416], > | 99.00th=[ 2024], 99.50th=[ 2224], 99.90th=[ 2544], 99.95th=[ 2640], > | 99.99th=[ 3632] > bw (KB /s): min=98352, max=177328, per=99.91%, avg=143772.11, > stdev=21782.39 > lat (usec) : 250=0.01%, 500=3.48%, 750=35.69%, 1000=30.01% > lat (msec) : 2=29.74%, 4=1.07%, 10=0.01% > cpu : usr=7.10%, sys=16.90%, ctx=54855, majf=0, minf=38 > IO depths : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=100.0%, > >=64=0.0% > submit : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, > >=64=0.0% > complete : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.1%, 64=0.0%, > >=64=0.0% > issued : total=r=1310720/w=0/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0 > latency : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=32 > > Run status group 0 (all jobs): > READ: io=5120.0MB, aggrb=143896KB/s, minb=143896KB/s, maxb=143896KB/s, > mint=36435msec, maxt=36435msec > > Disk stats (read/write): > vdb: ios=1301357/0, merge=0/0, ticks=1033036/0, in_queue=1032716, > util=99.85% > > > ----- Mail original ----- > De: "aderumier" <[email protected]> > À: "Robert LeBlanc" <[email protected]> > Cc: "Mark Nelson" <[email protected]>, "ceph-devel" < > [email protected]>, "pushpesh sharma" <[email protected]>, > "ceph-users" <[email protected]> > Envoyé: Mardi 9 Juin 2015 18:47:27 > Objet: Re: [ceph-users] rbd_cache, limiting read on high iops around 40k > > Hi Robert, > > >>What I found was that Ceph OSDs performed well with either > >>tcmalloc or jemalloc (except when RocksDB was built with jemalloc > >>instead of tcmalloc, I'm still working to dig into why that might be > >>the case). > yes,from my test, for osd tcmalloc is a little faster (but very little) > than jemalloc. > > > > >>However, I found that tcmalloc with QEMU/KVM was very detrimental to > >>small I/O, but provided huge gains in I/O >=1MB. Jemalloc was much > >>better for QEMU/KVM in the tests that we ran. [1] > > > Just have done qemu test (4k randread - rbd_cache=off), I don't see speed > regression with tcmalloc. > with qemu iothread, tcmalloc have a speed increase over glib > with qemu iothread, jemalloc have a speed decrease > > without iothread, jemalloc have a big speed increase > > this is with > -qemu 2.3 > -tcmalloc 2.2.1 > -jemmaloc 3.6 > -libc6 2.19 > > > qemu : no iothread : glibc : iops=33395 > qemu : no-iothread : tcmalloc : iops=34516 (+3%) > qemu : no-iothread : jemmaloc : iops=42226 (+26%) > > qemu : iothread : glibc : iops=34516 > qemu : iothread : tcmalloc : iops=38676 (+12%) > qemu : iothread : jemmaloc : iops=28023 (-19%) > > > (The benefit of iothreads is that we can scale with more disks in 1vm) > > > fio results: > ------------ > > qemu : iothread : tcmalloc : iops=38676 > ----------------------------------------- > rbd_iodepth32-test: (g=0): rw=randread, bs=4K-4K/4K-4K/4K-4K, > ioengine=libaio, iodepth=32 > fio-2.1.11 > Starting 1 process > Jobs: 1 (f=0): [r(1)] [100.0% done] [123.5MB/0KB/0KB /s] [31.6K/0/0 iops] > [eta 00m:00s] > rbd_iodepth32-test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=1265: Tue Jun 9 > 18:16:53 2015 > read : io=5120.0MB, bw=154707KB/s, iops=38676, runt= 33889msec > slat (usec): min=1, max=715, avg= 3.63, stdev= 3.42 > clat (usec): min=152, max=5736, avg=822.12, stdev=289.34 > lat (usec): min=231, max=5740, avg=826.10, stdev=289.08 > clat percentiles (usec): > | 1.00th=[ 402], 5.00th=[ 466], 10.00th=[ 510], 20.00th=[ 572], > | 30.00th=[ 636], 40.00th=[ 716], 50.00th=[ 780], 60.00th=[ 852], > | 70.00th=[ 932], 80.00th=[ 1020], 90.00th=[ 1160], 95.00th=[ 1352], > | 99.00th=[ 1800], 99.50th=[ 1944], 99.90th=[ 2256], 99.95th=[ 2448], > | 99.99th=[ 3888] > bw (KB /s): min=123888, max=198584, per=100.00%, avg=154824.40, > stdev=16978.03 > lat (usec) : 250=0.01%, 500=8.91%, 750=36.44%, 1000=32.63% > lat (msec) : 2=21.65%, 4=0.37%, 10=0.01% > cpu : usr=8.29%, sys=19.76%, ctx=55882, majf=0, minf=39 > IO depths : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=100.0%, >=64=0.0% > submit : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% > complete : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.1%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% > issued : total=r=1310720/w=0/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0 > latency : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=32 > > Run status group 0 (all jobs): > READ: io=5120.0MB, aggrb=154707KB/s, minb=154707KB/s, maxb=154707KB/s, > mint=33889msec, maxt=33889msec > > Disk stats (read/write): > vdb: ios=1302739/0, merge=0/0, ticks=934444/0, in_queue=934096, util=99.77% > > > > qemu : no-iothread : tcmalloc : iops=34516 > --------------------------------------------- > Jobs: 1 (f=1): [r(1)] [100.0% done] [163.2MB/0KB/0KB /s] [41.8K/0/0 iops] > [eta 00m:00s] > rbd_iodepth32-test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=896: Tue Jun 9 > 18:19:08 2015 > read : io=5120.0MB, bw=138065KB/s, iops=34516, runt= 37974msec > slat (usec): min=1, max=708, avg= 3.98, stdev= 3.57 > clat (usec): min=208, max=11858, avg=921.43, stdev=333.61 > lat (usec): min=266, max=11862, avg=925.77, stdev=333.40 > clat percentiles (usec): > | 1.00th=[ 434], 5.00th=[ 510], 10.00th=[ 564], 20.00th=[ 652], > | 30.00th=[ 732], 40.00th=[ 812], 50.00th=[ 876], 60.00th=[ 940], > | 70.00th=[ 1020], 80.00th=[ 1112], 90.00th=[ 1320], 95.00th=[ 1576], > | 99.00th=[ 1992], 99.50th=[ 2128], 99.90th=[ 2736], 99.95th=[ 3248], > | 99.99th=[ 4320] > bw (KB /s): min=77312, max=185576, per=99.74%, avg=137709.88, > stdev=16883.77 > lat (usec) : 250=0.01%, 500=4.36%, 750=27.61%, 1000=35.60% > lat (msec) : 2=31.49%, 4=0.92%, 10=0.02%, 20=0.01% > cpu : usr=7.19%, sys=19.52%, ctx=55903, majf=0, minf=38 > IO depths : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=100.0%, >=64=0.0% > submit : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% > complete : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.1%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% > issued : total=r=1310720/w=0/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0 > latency : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=32 > > Run status group 0 (all jobs): > READ: io=5120.0MB, aggrb=138064KB/s, minb=138064KB/s, maxb=138064KB/s, > mint=37974msec, maxt=37974msec > > Disk stats (read/write): > vdb: ios=1309902/0, merge=0/0, ticks=1068768/0, in_queue=1068396, > util=99.86% > > > > qemu : iothread : glibc : iops=34516 > ------------------------------------- > > rbd_iodepth32-test: (g=0): rw=randread, bs=4K-4K/4K-4K/4K-4K, > ioengine=libaio, iodepth=32 > fio-2.1.11 > Starting 1 process > Jobs: 1 (f=1): [r(1)] [100.0% done] [133.4MB/0KB/0KB /s] [34.2K/0/0 iops] > [eta 00m:00s] > rbd_iodepth32-test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=876: Tue Jun 9 > 18:24:01 2015 > read : io=5120.0MB, bw=137786KB/s, iops=34446, runt= 38051msec > slat (usec): min=1, max=496, avg= 3.88, stdev= 3.66 > clat (usec): min=283, max=7515, avg=923.34, stdev=300.28 > lat (usec): min=286, max=7519, avg=927.58, stdev=300.02 > clat percentiles (usec): > | 1.00th=[ 506], 5.00th=[ 564], 10.00th=[ 596], 20.00th=[ 652], > | 30.00th=[ 724], 40.00th=[ 804], 50.00th=[ 884], 60.00th=[ 964], > | 70.00th=[ 1048], 80.00th=[ 1144], 90.00th=[ 1304], 95.00th=[ 1448], > | 99.00th=[ 1896], 99.50th=[ 2096], 99.90th=[ 2480], 99.95th=[ 2640], > | 99.99th=[ 3984] > bw (KB /s): min=102680, max=171112, per=100.00%, avg=137877.78, > stdev=15521.30 > lat (usec) : 500=0.84%, 750=32.97%, 1000=30.82% > lat (msec) : 2=34.65%, 4=0.71%, 10=0.01% > cpu : usr=7.42%, sys=19.47%, ctx=52455, majf=0, minf=38 > IO depths : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=100.0%, >=64=0.0% > submit : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% > complete : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.1%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% > issued : total=r=1310720/w=0/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0 > latency : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=32 > > Run status group 0 (all jobs): > READ: io=5120.0MB, aggrb=137785KB/s, minb=137785KB/s, maxb=137785KB/s, > mint=38051msec, maxt=38051msec > > Disk stats (read/write): > vdb: ios=1307426/0, merge=0/0, ticks=1051416/0, in_queue=1050972, > util=99.85% > > > > qemu : no iothread : glibc : iops=33395 > ----------------------------------------- > rbd_iodepth32-test: (g=0): rw=randread, bs=4K-4K/4K-4K/4K-4K, > ioengine=libaio, iodepth=32 > fio-2.1.11 > Starting 1 process > Jobs: 1 (f=1): [r(1)] [100.0% done] [125.4MB/0KB/0KB /s] [32.9K/0/0 iops] > [eta 00m:00s] > rbd_iodepth32-test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=886: Tue Jun 9 > 18:27:18 2015 > read : io=5120.0MB, bw=133583KB/s, iops=33395, runt= 39248msec > slat (usec): min=1, max=1054, avg= 3.86, stdev= 4.29 > clat (usec): min=139, max=12635, avg=952.85, stdev=335.51 > lat (usec): min=303, max=12638, avg=957.01, stdev=335.29 > clat percentiles (usec): > | 1.00th=[ 516], 5.00th=[ 564], 10.00th=[ 596], 20.00th=[ 652], > | 30.00th=[ 724], 40.00th=[ 820], 50.00th=[ 924], 60.00th=[ 996], > | 70.00th=[ 1080], 80.00th=[ 1176], 90.00th=[ 1336], 95.00th=[ 1528], > | 99.00th=[ 2096], 99.50th=[ 2320], 99.90th=[ 2672], 99.95th=[ 2928], > | 99.99th=[ 4832] > bw (KB /s): min=98136, max=171624, per=100.00%, avg=133682.64, > stdev=19121.91 > lat (usec) : 250=0.01%, 500=0.57%, 750=32.57%, 1000=26.98% > lat (msec) : 2=38.59%, 4=1.28%, 10=0.01%, 20=0.01% > cpu : usr=9.24%, sys=15.92%, ctx=51219, majf=0, minf=38 > IO depths : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=100.0%, >=64=0.0% > submit : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% > complete : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.1%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% > issued : total=r=1310720/w=0/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0 > latency : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=32 > > Run status group 0 (all jobs): > READ: io=5120.0MB, aggrb=133583KB/s, minb=133583KB/s, maxb=133583KB/s, > mint=39248msec, maxt=39248msec > > Disk stats (read/write): > vdb: ios=1304526/0, merge=0/0, ticks=1075020/0, in_queue=1074536, > util=99.84% > > > > qemu : iothread : jemmaloc : iops=28023 > ---------------------------------------- > rbd_iodepth32-test: (g=0): rw=randread, bs=4K-4K/4K-4K/4K-4K, > ioengine=libaio, iodepth=32 > fio-2.1.11 > Starting 1 process > Jobs: 1 (f=1): [r(1)] [97.9% done] [155.2MB/0KB/0KB /s] [39.1K/0/0 iops] > [eta 00m:01s] > rbd_iodepth32-test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=899: Tue Jun 9 > 18:30:26 2015 > read : io=5120.0MB, bw=112094KB/s, iops=28023, runt= 46772msec > slat (usec): min=1, max=467, avg= 4.33, stdev= 4.77 > clat (usec): min=253, max=11307, avg=1135.63, stdev=346.55 > lat (usec): min=256, max=11309, avg=1140.39, stdev=346.22 > clat percentiles (usec): > | 1.00th=[ 510], 5.00th=[ 628], 10.00th=[ 700], 20.00th=[ 820], > | 30.00th=[ 924], 40.00th=[ 1032], 50.00th=[ 1128], 60.00th=[ 1224], > | 70.00th=[ 1320], 80.00th=[ 1416], 90.00th=[ 1560], 95.00th=[ 1688], > | 99.00th=[ 2096], 99.50th=[ 2224], 99.90th=[ 2544], 99.95th=[ 2832], > | 99.99th=[ 3760] > bw (KB /s): min=91792, max=174416, per=99.90%, avg=111985.27, > stdev=17381.70 > lat (usec) : 500=0.80%, 750=13.10%, 1000=23.33% > lat (msec) : 2=61.30%, 4=1.46%, 10=0.01%, 20=0.01% > cpu : usr=7.12%, sys=17.43%, ctx=54507, majf=0, minf=38 > IO depths : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=100.0%, >=64=0.0% > submit : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% > complete : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.1%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% > issued : total=r=1310720/w=0/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0 > latency : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=32 > > Run status group 0 (all jobs): > READ: io=5120.0MB, aggrb=112094KB/s, minb=112094KB/s, maxb=112094KB/s, > mint=46772msec, maxt=46772msec > > Disk stats (read/write): > vdb: ios=1309169/0, merge=0/0, ticks=1305796/0, in_queue=1305376, > util=98.68% > > > > qemu : non-iothread : jemmaloc : iops=42226 > -------------------------------------------- > rbd_iodepth32-test: (g=0): rw=randread, bs=4K-4K/4K-4K/4K-4K, > ioengine=libaio, iodepth=32 > fio-2.1.11 > Starting 1 process > Jobs: 1 (f=1): [r(1)] [100.0% done] [171.2MB/0KB/0KB /s] [43.9K/0/0 iops] > [eta 00m:00s] > rbd_iodepth32-test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=892: Tue Jun 9 > 18:34:11 2015 > read : io=5120.0MB, bw=177130KB/s, iops=44282, runt= 29599msec > slat (usec): min=1, max=527, avg= 3.80, stdev= 3.74 > clat (usec): min=174, max=3841, avg=717.08, stdev=237.53 > lat (usec): min=210, max=3844, avg=721.23, stdev=237.22 > clat percentiles (usec): > | 1.00th=[ 354], 5.00th=[ 422], 10.00th=[ 462], 20.00th=[ 516], > | 30.00th=[ 572], 40.00th=[ 628], 50.00th=[ 684], 60.00th=[ 740], > | 70.00th=[ 804], 80.00th=[ 884], 90.00th=[ 1004], 95.00th=[ 1128], > | 99.00th=[ 1544], 99.50th=[ 1672], 99.90th=[ 1928], 99.95th=[ 2064], > | 99.99th=[ 2608] > bw (KB /s): min=138120, max=230816, per=100.00%, avg=177192.14, > stdev=23440.79 > lat (usec) : 250=0.01%, 500=16.24%, 750=45.93%, 1000=27.46% > lat (msec) : 2=10.30%, 4=0.07% > cpu : usr=10.14%, sys=23.84%, ctx=60938, majf=0, minf=39 > IO depths : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=100.0%, >=64=0.0% > submit : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% > complete : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.1%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% > issued : total=r=1310720/w=0/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0 > latency : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=32 > > Run status group 0 (all jobs): > READ: io=5120.0MB, aggrb=177130KB/s, minb=177130KB/s, maxb=177130KB/s, > mint=29599msec, maxt=29599msec > > Disk stats (read/write): > vdb: ios=1303992/0, merge=0/0, ticks=798008/0, in_queue=797636, util=99.80% > > > > ----- Mail original ----- > De: "Robert LeBlanc" <[email protected]> > À: "aderumier" <[email protected]> > Cc: "Mark Nelson" <[email protected]>, "ceph-devel" < > [email protected]>, "pushpesh sharma" <[email protected]>, > "ceph-users" <[email protected]> > Envoyé: Mardi 9 Juin 2015 18:00:29 > Objet: Re: [ceph-users] rbd_cache, limiting read on high iops around 40k > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 > > I also saw a similar performance increase by using alternative memory > allocators. What I found was that Ceph OSDs performed well with either > tcmalloc or jemalloc (except when RocksDB was built with jemalloc > instead of tcmalloc, I'm still working to dig into why that might be > the case). > > However, I found that tcmalloc with QEMU/KVM was very detrimental to > small I/O, but provided huge gains in I/O >=1MB. Jemalloc was much > better for QEMU/KVM in the tests that we ran. [1] > > I'm currently looking into I/O bottlenecks around the 16KB range and > I'm seeing a lot of time in thread creation and destruction, the > memory allocators are quite a bit down the list (both fio with > ioengine rbd and on the OSDs). I wonder what the difference can be. > I've tried using the async messenger but there wasn't a huge > difference. [2] > > Further down the rabbit hole.... > > [1] https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg20197.html > [2] https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg23982.html > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: Mailvelope v0.13.1 > Comment: https://www.mailvelope.com > > wsFcBAEBCAAQBQJVdw2ZCRDmVDuy+mK58QAA4MwP/1vt65cvTyyVGGSGRrE8 > unuWjafMHzl486XH+EaVrDVTXFVFOoncJ6kugSpD7yavtCpZNdhsIaTRZguU > YpfAppNAJU5biSwNv9QPI7kPP2q2+I7Z8ZkvhcVnkjIythoeNnSjV7zJrw87 > afq46GhPHqEXdjp3rOB4RRPniOMnub5oU6QRnKn3HPW8Dx9ZqTeCofRDnCY2 > S695Dt1gzt0ERUOgrUUkt0FQJdkkV6EURcUschngjtEd5727VTLp02HivVl3 > vDYWxQHPK8oS6Xe8GOW0JjulwiqlYotSlrqSU5FMU5gozbk9zMFPIUW1e+51 > 9ART8Ta2ItMhPWtAhRwwvxgy51exCy9kBc+m+ptKW5XRUXOImGcOQxszPGOO > qIIOG1vVG/GBmo/0i6tliqBFYdXmw1qFV7tFiIbisZRH7Q/1NahjYTHqHhu3 > Dv61T6WrerD+9N6S1Lrz1QYe2Fqa56BHhHSXM82NE86SVxEvUkoGegQU+c7b > 6rY1JvuJHJzva7+M2XHApYCchCs4a1Yyd1qWB7yThJD57RIyX1TOg0+siV13 > R+v6wxhQU0vBovH+5oAWmCZaPNT+F0Uvs3xWAxxaIR9r83wMj9qQeBZTKVzQ > 1aFIi15KqAwOp12yWCmrqKTeXhjwYQNd8viCQCGN7AQyPglmzfbuEHalVjz4 > oSJX > =k281 > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > ---------------- > Robert LeBlanc > GPG Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1 > > > On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 6:02 AM, Alexandre DERUMIER <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>>Frankly, I'm a little impressed that without RBD cache we can hit 80K > >>>IOPS from 1 VM! > > > > Note that theses result are not in a vm (fio-rbd on host), so in a vm > we'll have overhead. > > (I'm planning to send results in qemu soon) > > > >>>How fast are the SSDs in those 3 OSDs? > > > > Theses results are with datas in buffer memory of osd nodes. > > > > When reading fulling on ssd (intel s3500), > > > > For 1 client, > > > > I'm around 33k iops without cache and 32k iops with cache, with 1 osd. > > I'm around 55k iops without cache and 38k iops with cache, with 3 osd. > > > > with multiple clients jobs, I can reach around 70kiops by osd , and 250k > iops by osd when datas are in buffer. > > > > (cpus servers/clients are 2x 10 cores 3,1ghz e5 xeon) > > > > > > > > small tip : > > I'm using tcmalloc for fio-rbd or rados bench to improve latencies by > around 20% > > > > LD_PRELOAD=/usr/lib/libtcmalloc_minimal.so.4 fio ... > > LD_PRELOAD=/usr/lib/libtcmalloc_minimal.so.4 rados bench ... > > > > as a lot of time is spent in malloc/free > > > > > > (qemu support also tcmalloc since some months , I'll bench it too > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2015-03/msg05372.html) > > > > > > > > I'll try to send full bench results soon, from 1 to 18 ssd osd. > > > > > > > > > > ----- Mail original ----- > > De: "Mark Nelson" <[email protected]> > > À: "aderumier" <[email protected]>, "pushpesh sharma" < > [email protected]> > > Cc: "ceph-devel" <[email protected]>, "ceph-users" < > [email protected]> > > Envoyé: Mardi 9 Juin 2015 13:36:31 > > Objet: Re: [ceph-users] rbd_cache, limiting read on high iops around 40k > > > > Hi All, > > > > In the past we've hit some performance issues with RBD cache that we've > > fixed, but we've never really tried pushing a single VM beyond 40+K read > > IOPS in testing (or at least I never have). I suspect there's a couple > > of possibilities as to why it might be slower, but perhaps joshd can > > chime in as he's more familiar with what that code looks like. > > > > Frankly, I'm a little impressed that without RBD cache we can hit 80K > > IOPS from 1 VM! How fast are the SSDs in those 3 OSDs? > > > > Mark > > > > On 06/09/2015 03:36 AM, Alexandre DERUMIER wrote: > >> It's seem that the limit is mainly going in high queue depth (+- > 16) > >> > >> Here the result in iops with 1client- 4krandread- 3osd - with > differents queue depth size. > >> rbd_cache is almost the same than without cache with queue depth <16 > >> > >> > >> cache > >> ----- > >> qd1: 1651 > >> qd2: 3482 > >> qd4: 7958 > >> qd8: 17912 > >> qd16: 36020 > >> qd32: 42765 > >> qd64: 46169 > >> > >> no cache > >> -------- > >> qd1: 1748 > >> qd2: 3570 > >> qd4: 8356 > >> qd8: 17732 > >> qd16: 41396 > >> qd32: 78633 > >> qd64: 79063 > >> qd128: 79550 > >> > >> > >> ----- Mail original ----- > >> De: "aderumier" <[email protected]> > >> À: "pushpesh sharma" <[email protected]> > >> Cc: "ceph-devel" <[email protected]>, "ceph-users" < > [email protected]> > >> Envoyé: Mardi 9 Juin 2015 09:28:21 > >> Objet: Re: [ceph-users] rbd_cache, limiting read on high iops around 40k > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >>>> We tried adding more RBDs to single VM, but no luck. > >> > >> If you want to scale with more disks in a single qemu vm, you need to > use iothread feature from qemu and assign 1 iothread by disk (works with > virtio-blk). > >> It's working for me, I can scale with adding more disks. > >> > >> > >> My bench here are done with fio-rbd on host. > >> I can scale up to 400k iops with 10clients-rbd_cache=off on a single > host and around 250kiops 10clients-rbdcache=on. > >> > >> > >> I just wonder why I don't have performance decrease around 30k iops > with 1osd. > >> > >> I'm going to see if this tracker > >> http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11056 > >> > >> could be the cause. > >> > >> (My master build was done some week ago) > >> > >> > >> > >> ----- Mail original ----- > >> De: "pushpesh sharma" <[email protected]> > >> À: "aderumier" <[email protected]> > >> Cc: "ceph-devel" <[email protected]>, "ceph-users" < > [email protected]> > >> Envoyé: Mardi 9 Juin 2015 09:21:04 > >> Objet: Re: rbd_cache, limiting read on high iops around 40k > >> > >> Hi Alexandre, > >> > >> We have also seen something very similar on Hammer(0.94-1). We were > doing some benchmarking for VMs hosted on hypervisor (QEMU-KVM, > openstack-juno). Each Ubuntu-VM has a RBD as root disk, and 1 RBD as > additional storage. For some strange reason it was not able to scale 4K- RR > iops on each VM beyond 35-40k. We tried adding more RBDs to single VM, but > no luck. However increasing number of VMs to 4 on a single hypervisor did > scale to some extent. After this there was no much benefit we got from > adding more VMs. > >> > >> Here is the trend we have seen, x-axis is number of hypervisor, each > hypervisor has 4 VM, each VM has 1 RBD:- > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> VDbench is used as benchmarking tool. We were not saturating network > and CPUs at OSD nodes. We were not able to saturate CPUs at hypervisors, > and that is where we were suspecting of some throttling effect. However we > haven't setted any such limits from nova or kvm end. We tried some CPU > pinning and other KVM related tuning as well, but no luck. > >> > >> We tried the same experiment on a bare metal. It was 4K RR IOPs were > scaling from 40K(1 RBD) to 180K(4 RBDs). But after that rather than scaling > beyond that point the numbers were actually degrading. (Single pipe more > congestion effect) > >> > >> We never suspected that rbd cache enable could be detrimental to > performance. It would nice to route cause the problem if that is the case. > >> > >> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 11:21 AM, Alexandre DERUMIER < > [email protected] > wrote: > >> > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> I'm doing benchmark (ceph master branch), with randread 4k qdepth=32, > >> and rbd_cache=true seem to limit the iops around 40k > >> > >> > >> no cache > >> -------- > >> 1 client - rbd_cache=false - 1osd : 38300 iops > >> 1 client - rbd_cache=false - 2osd : 69073 iops > >> 1 client - rbd_cache=false - 3osd : 78292 iops > >> > >> > >> cache > >> ----- > >> 1 client - rbd_cache=true - 1osd : 38100 iops > >> 1 client - rbd_cache=true - 2osd : 42457 iops > >> 1 client - rbd_cache=true - 3osd : 45823 iops > >> > >> > >> > >> Is it expected ? > >> > >> > >> > >> fio result rbd_cache=false 3 osd > >> -------------------------------- > >> rbd_iodepth32-test: (g=0): rw=randread, bs=4K-4K/4K-4K/4K-4K, > ioengine=rbd, iodepth=32 > >> fio-2.1.11 > >> Starting 1 process > >> rbd engine: RBD version: 0.1.9 > >> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [r(1)] [100.0% done] [307.5MB/0KB/0KB /s] [78.8K/0/0 > iops] [eta 00m:00s] > >> rbd_iodepth32-test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=113548: Tue Jun 9 > 07:48:42 2015 > >> read : io=10000MB, bw=313169KB/s, iops=78292, runt= 32698msec > >> slat (usec): min=5, max=530, avg=11.77, stdev= 6.77 > >> clat (usec): min=70, max=2240, avg=336.08, stdev=94.82 > >> lat (usec): min=101, max=2247, avg=347.84, stdev=95.49 > >> clat percentiles (usec): > >> | 1.00th=[ 173], 5.00th=[ 209], 10.00th=[ 231], 20.00th=[ 262], > >> | 30.00th=[ 282], 40.00th=[ 302], 50.00th=[ 322], 60.00th=[ 346], > >> | 70.00th=[ 370], 80.00th=[ 402], 90.00th=[ 454], 95.00th=[ 506], > >> | 99.00th=[ 628], 99.50th=[ 692], 99.90th=[ 860], 99.95th=[ 948], > >> | 99.99th=[ 1176] > >> bw (KB /s): min=238856, max=360448, per=100.00%, avg=313402.34, > stdev=25196.21 > >> lat (usec) : 100=0.01%, 250=15.94%, 500=78.60%, 750=5.19%, 1000=0.23% > >> lat (msec) : 2=0.03%, 4=0.01% > >> cpu : usr=74.48%, sys=13.25%, ctx=703225, majf=0, minf=12452 > >> IO depths : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.8%, 16=87.0%, 32=12.1%, > >=64=0.0% > >> submit : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% > >> complete : 0=0.0%, 4=91.6%, 8=3.4%, 16=4.5%, 32=0.4%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% > >> issued : total=r=2560000/w=0/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0 > >> latency : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=32 > >> > >> Run status group 0 (all jobs): > >> READ: io=10000MB, aggrb=313169KB/s, minb=313169KB/s, maxb=313169KB/s, > mint=32698msec, maxt=32698msec > >> > >> Disk stats (read/write): > >> dm-0: ios=0/45, merge=0/0, ticks=0/0, in_queue=0, util=0.00%, > aggrios=0/24, aggrmerge=0/21, aggrticks=0/0, aggrin_queue=0, aggrutil=0.00% > >> sda: ios=0/24, merge=0/21, ticks=0/0, in_queue=0, util=0.00% > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> fio result rbd_cache=true 3osd > >> ------------------------------ > >> > >> rbd_iodepth32-test: (g=0): rw=randread, bs=4K-4K/4K-4K/4K-4K, > ioengine=rbd, iodepth=32 > >> fio-2.1.11 > >> Starting 1 process > >> rbd engine: RBD version: 0.1.9 > >> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [r(1)] [100.0% done] [171.6MB/0KB/0KB /s] [43.1K/0/0 > iops] [eta 00m:00s] > >> rbd_iodepth32-test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=113389: Tue Jun 9 > 07:47:30 2015 > >> read : io=10000MB, bw=183296KB/s, iops=45823, runt= 55866msec > >> slat (usec): min=7, max=805, avg=21.26, stdev=15.84 > >> clat (usec): min=101, max=4602, avg=478.55, stdev=143.73 > >> lat (usec): min=123, max=4669, avg=499.80, stdev=146.03 > >> clat percentiles (usec): > >> | 1.00th=[ 227], 5.00th=[ 274], 10.00th=[ 306], 20.00th=[ 350], > >> | 30.00th=[ 390], 40.00th=[ 430], 50.00th=[ 470], 60.00th=[ 506], > >> | 70.00th=[ 548], 80.00th=[ 596], 90.00th=[ 660], 95.00th=[ 724], > >> | 99.00th=[ 844], 99.50th=[ 908], 99.90th=[ 1112], 99.95th=[ 1288], > >> | 99.99th=[ 2192] > >> bw (KB /s): min=115280, max=204416, per=100.00%, avg=183315.10, > stdev=15079.93 > >> lat (usec) : 250=2.42%, 500=55.61%, 750=38.48%, 1000=3.28% > >> lat (msec) : 2=0.19%, 4=0.01%, 10=0.01% > >> cpu : usr=60.27%, sys=12.01%, ctx=2995393, majf=0, minf=14100 > >> IO depths : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.2%, 8=13.5%, 16=81.0%, 32=5.3%, > >=64=0.0% > >> submit : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% > >> complete : 0=0.0%, 4=95.0%, 8=0.1%, 16=1.0%, 32=4.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% > >> issued : total=r=2560000/w=0/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0 > >> latency : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=32 > >> > >> Run status group 0 (all jobs): > >> READ: io=10000MB, aggrb=183295KB/s, minb=183295KB/s, maxb=183295KB/s, > mint=55866msec, maxt=55866msec > >> > >> Disk stats (read/write): > >> dm-0: ios=0/61, merge=0/0, ticks=0/8, in_queue=8, util=0.01%, > aggrios=0/29, aggrmerge=0/32, aggrticks=0/8, aggrin_queue=8, aggrutil=0.01% > >> sda: ios=0/29, merge=0/32, ticks=0/8, in_queue=8, util=0.01% > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > ceph-users mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com > _______________________________________________ > ceph-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com > -- С уважением, Фасихов Ирек Нургаязович Моб.: +79229045757
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
