Since fio /dev/rbd0 sync=1 works well, it doesn't matter with ceph server,
just related to librbd (rbd_aio_flush) implement?

2016-02-26 14:50 GMT+08:00 Huan Zhang <[email protected]>:

> rbd engine with fsync=1 seems stuck.
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [w(1)] [0.0% done] [0KB/0KB/0KB /s] [0/0/0 iops] [eta
> 1244d:10h:39m:18s]
>
> But fio using /dev/rbd0 sync=1 direct=1 ioengine=libaio iodepth=64, get
> very high iops ~35K, similar to direct wirte.
>
> I'm confused with that result, IMHO, ceph could just ignore the sync cache
> command since it always use sync write to journal, right?
>
> Why we get so bad sync iops, how ceph handle it?
> Very appreciated to get your reply!
>
> 2016-02-25 22:44 GMT+08:00 Jason Dillaman <[email protected]>:
>
>> > 35K IOPS with ioengine=rbd sounds like the "sync=1" option doesn't
>> actually
>> > work. Or it's not touching the same object (but I wonder whether write
>> > ordering is preserved at that rate?).
>>
>> The fio rbd engine does not support "sync=1"; however, it should support
>> "fsync=1" to accomplish roughly the same effect.
>>
>> Jason
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com

Reply via email to