Re: [Lustre-discuss] raid5 patches for rhel5
On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 01:51:36PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote: >On Aug 01, 2008 09:38 -0400, Robin Humble wrote: >> done, and yes, performance is largely the same as RHEL4. cool! >> >> Version 1.03 --Sequential Output-- --Sequential Input- >> --Random- >> -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block-- >> --Seeks-- >> Machine Size:chnk K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec >> %CP >> rhel4 oss 16G:256k 84624 99 842138 92 310044 91 77675 99 491239 96 285.8 >> 10 >> rhel5 oss 16G:256k 86085 99 827731 95 327007 97 79639 100 495487 98 456.2 >> 18 >> >> streaming writes are down marginally on rhel5, but seeks/s are up 50%. >Good to know, thanks. > >> BTW - the above is with 1.6.4.3 clients. >Is this with 1.6.5 servers or 1.6.4.3 servers? that's with 1.6.5.1 RHEL5 servers. >> 1.6.5.1 client still perform badly for us. eg. >Have you tried disabling the checksums? > lctl set_param osc.*.checksums=0 yes, checksums were disabled. >Note that 1.6.5 clients -> 1.6.5 servers with checksums enabled will perform >better than mixed client/server because 1.6.5 has a more efficient checksum >algorithm. >> Version 1.03 --Sequential Output-- --Sequential Input- >> --Random- >> -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block-- >> --Seeks-- >> Machine Size:chnk K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec >> %CP >>16G:256k 77216 99 462659 100 296050 96 68100 81 648350 93 >> 422.2 13 >> >> which shows better streaming writes, but ~1/2 the streaming read speed :-( >You are getting that backward... 55% of the previous write speed, >90% of the previous overwrite speed, and 130% of the previous read speed. doh! yes, backwards... that was patchless 2.6.23 clients BTW. >> > Note that there are also similar >> >performance improvements for RAID-6. >> I can't see the RAID6 patches in the tree for RHEL5... am I missing >> something? >Sigh, RAID6 patches were ported to RHEL4, but not RHEL5... I've filed >bug 16587 about that, but have no idea when it will be completed. cool - thanks! cheers, robin ___ Lustre-discuss mailing list Lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
Re: [Lustre-discuss] raid5 patches for rhel5
On Aug 01, 2008 09:38 -0400, Robin Humble wrote: > done, and yes, performance is largely the same as RHEL4. cool! > > Version 1.03 --Sequential Output-- --Sequential Input- > --Random- > -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block-- > --Seeks-- > Machine Size:chnk K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec > %CP > rhel4 oss 16G:256k 84624 99 842138 92 310044 91 77675 99 491239 96 285.8 > 10 > rhel5 oss 16G:256k 86085 99 827731 95 327007 97 79639 100 495487 98 456.2 > 18 > > streaming writes are down marginally on rhel5, but seeks/s are up 50%. Good to know, thanks. > BTW - the above is with 1.6.4.3 clients. Is this with 1.6.5 servers or 1.6.4.3 servers? > 1.6.5.1 client still perform badly for us. eg. Have you tried disabling the checksums? lctl set_param osc.*.checksums=0 Note that 1.6.5 clients -> 1.6.5 servers with checksums enabled will perform better than mixed client/server because 1.6.5 has a more efficient checksum algorithm. > Version 1.03 --Sequential Output-- --Sequential Input- > --Random- > -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block-- > --Seeks-- > Machine Size:chnk K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec > %CP >16G:256k 77216 99 462659 100 296050 96 68100 81 648350 93 > 422.2 13 > > which shows better streaming writes, but ~1/2 the streaming read speed :-( You are getting that backward... 55% of the previous write speed, 90% of the previous overwrite speed, and 130% of the previous read speed. > > Note that there are also similar > >performance improvements for RAID-6. > > I can't see the RAID6 patches in the tree for RHEL5... am I missing > something? Sigh, RAID6 patches were ported to RHEL4, but not RHEL5... I've filed bug 16587 about that, but have no idea when it will be completed. Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc. ___ Lustre-discuss mailing list Lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
Re: [Lustre-discuss] raid5 patches for rhel5
On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 11:08:41PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote: >On Jul 18, 2008 08:39 -0400, Robin Humble wrote: >> I notice that Lustre 1.6.5 brings with it the md layer RAID5 patches >> for RHEL5 kernels. thanks! :-) >> are all the RHEL4 optimisations there, so we should get the same >> performance if we now move our OSS's to RHEL5? >That is my understanding, yes. done, and yes, performance is largely the same as RHEL4. cool! Version 1.03 --Sequential Output-- --Sequential Input- --Random- -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block-- --Seeks-- Machine Size:chnk K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec %CP rhel4 oss 16G:256k 84624 99 842138 92 310044 91 77675 99 491239 96 285.8 10 rhel5 oss 16G:256k 86085 99 827731 95 327007 97 79639 100 495487 98 456.2 18 streaming writes are down marginally on rhel5, but seeks/s are up 50%. BTW - the above is with 1.6.4.3 clients. 1.6.5.1 client still perform badly for us. eg. Version 1.03 --Sequential Output-- --Sequential Input- --Random- -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block-- --Seeks-- Machine Size:chnk K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec %CP 16G:256k 77216 99 462659 100 296050 96 68100 81 648350 93 422.2 13 which shows better streaming writes, but ~1/2 the streaming read speed :-( > Note that there are also similar >performance improvements for RAID-6. I can't see the RAID6 patches in the tree for RHEL5... am I missing something? cheers, robin ___ Lustre-discuss mailing list Lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
Re: [Lustre-discuss] raid5 patches for rhel5
On Jul 18, 2008 08:39 -0400, Robin Humble wrote: > I notice that Lustre 1.6.5 brings with it the md layer RAID5 patches > for RHEL5 kernels. thanks! :-) > are all the RHEL4 optimisations there, so we should get the same > performance if we now move our OSS's to RHEL5? That is my understanding, yes. Note that there are also similar performance improvements for RAID-6. Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc. ___ Lustre-discuss mailing list Lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
[Lustre-discuss] raid5 patches for rhel5
I notice that Lustre 1.6.5 brings with it the md layer RAID5 patches for RHEL5 kernels. thanks! :-) are all the RHEL4 optimisations there, so we should get the same performance if we now move our OSS's to RHEL5? cheers, robin ___ Lustre-discuss mailing list Lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
