Which version of PVFS are you using?

Your setup will work better if each of your 16 servers are both meta and
I/O servers.  Your current configuration causes a bottleneck at the
metadata server.

BEcky
-- 
Becky Ligon
HPC Admin Staff
PVFS/OrangeFS Developer
Clemson University/Omnibond.com
864-650-4065

> Hi guys,
>
> I am a PVFS2 newbie and made some performance tests using IOZone, but the
> results puzzle me. I have 16 machines. One is meta data server, and other
> 15 machines are both PVFS2 IO servers and clients.  Each client machine
> runs one IOZone process, so the aggregate performance is measured. Those
> machines are configured as follows: one Intel i7-860 processor, 16GB DDR3
> memory and 1TB SATA hard disk. They are connected through a gigabit
> Ethernet switch. The OS is Debian Lenny (2.6.26 kernel). The PVFS2 is
> 2.8.2 with default configuration.
>
> The IOZone command used is: ./iozone -i 0 -i 1 -i 2 -r 4m -s 32g -t 15 -+m
> pvfs_client_list. Since the memory capacity for each machine is 16GB, so I
> set the test file size to 32GB to exercise the PVFS2 heavily. The result
> is listed below:
>
> Record Size 4096 KB
>     File size set to 33554432 KB
>     Network distribution mode enabled.
>     Command line used: ./iozone -i 0 -i 1 -i 2 -r 4m -s 32g -t 15 -+m
> pvfs_client_list
>     Output is in Kbytes/sec
>     Time Resolution = 0.000001 seconds.
>     Processor cache size set to 1024 Kbytes.
>     Processor cache line size set to 32 bytes.
>     File stride size set to 17 * record size.
>     Throughput test with 15 processes
>     Each process writes a 33554432 Kbyte file in 4096 Kbyte records
>
>     Test running:
>     Children see throughput for 15 initial writers     =  785775.56
> KB/sec
>     Min throughput per process             =   50273.01 KB/sec
>     Max throughput per process             =   53785.79 KB/sec
>     Avg throughput per process             =   52385.04 KB/sec
>     Min xfer                     = 31375360.00 KB
>
>     Test running:
>     Children see throughput for 15 rewriters     =  612876.38 KB/sec
>     Min throughput per process             =   39466.78 KB/sec
>     Max throughput per process             =   41843.63 KB/sec
>     Avg throughput per process             =   40858.43 KB/sec
>     Min xfer                     = 31649792.00 KB
>
>     Test running:
>     Children see throughput for 15 readers         =  366397.27 KB/sec
>     Min throughput per process             =    9371.45 KB/sec
>     Max throughput per process             =   29229.74 KB/sec
>     Avg throughput per process             =   24426.48 KB/sec
>     Min xfer                     = 10760192.00 KB
>
>     Test running:
>     Children see throughput for 15 re-readers     =  370985.14 KB/sec
>     Min throughput per process             =    9850.98 KB/sec
>     Max throughput per process             =   29660.86 KB/sec
>     Avg throughput per process             =   24732.34 KB/sec
>     Min xfer                     = 11145216.00 KB
>
>     Test running:
>     Children see throughput for 15 random readers     =  257970.32 KB/sec
>     Min throughput per process             =    8147.65 KB/sec
>     Max throughput per process             =   20084.32 KB/sec
>     Avg throughput per process             =   17198.02 KB/sec
>     Min xfer                     = 13615104.00 KB
>
>     Test running:
>     Children see throughput for 15 random writers     =  376059.73 KB/sec
>     Min throughput per process             =   24060.38 KB/sec
>     Max throughput per process             =   26446.96 KB/sec
>     Avg throughput per process             =   25070.65 KB/sec
>     Min xfer                     = 30527488.00 KB
>
> I have three questions:
>  1. Why does write outperforms rewrite significantly? According to
> IOZone's document, rewrite is supposed to perform better, since it
> writes to a file which already exists, and the metadata is already
> there.
>  2. Why is write/random-write faster than read/random-read so much? This
> result is really unexpected. I feel that read is supposed to be faster.
> Is there anything wrong in my result numbers?
>  3. Observing the max and min throughput per process in each test item,
> you can find that in write/re-write/random-write, the difference between
> max and min is acceptable; while in read/re-read/random-read, the max
> throughput is about two or three times of the min number. How can I
> explain this result? Is it normal?
>
> These results are out of my expectation. Is it possible that they are
> caused by faulty hardware (network or disk) or configuration?
>
> Any advice is appreciated.
>
> Sincerely,
> Wantao_______________________________________________
> Pvfs2-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.beowulf-underground.org/mailman/listinfo/pvfs2-users
>


_______________________________________________
Pvfs2-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.beowulf-underground.org/mailman/listinfo/pvfs2-users

Reply via email to