-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hi All
The Ubuntu Kernel team have spent the last few weeks investigating the
apparent performance disparity between RHEL 7 and Ubuntu 14.04; we've
focussed efforts in a few ways (see below).
All testing has been done using the latest Firefly
Hi James,
Interesting results, but did you do any tests with a NUMA system? IIUC
the original report was from a dual socket setup, and that'd
presumably be the standard setup for most folks (both OSD server and
client side).
Cheers,
On 20 February 2015 at 20:07, James Page james.p...@ubuntu.com
Yeah, I remind of that we should has a pending work for ObjectStore
refactor bp[1]. We need to change KeyValueDB interface to adopt new
improvment
[1]: http://pad.ceph.com/p/hammer-osd_transaction_encoding
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Somnath Roy somnath@sandisk.com wrote:
Thanks Sage
Actually, I'm concerned about the correctness of benchmark using
MemStore. AFAR it may cause lots of memory frag and cause performance
degraded hugely. Maybe set filestore_blackhole=true is more
precious?
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 5:49 PM, Blair Bethwaite
blair.bethwa...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
So cool!
A little notes:
1. What about sync thread in NewStore?
2. Could we consider skipping WAL for large overwrite(backfill, RGW)?
3. Sorry, what means [aio_]fsync?
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 7:50 AM, Sage Weil sw...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi everyone,
We talked a bit about the proposed KeyFile
Team leads,
Please review QE validation results summary in
http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10501
Loic - this RC looks ready for release (in my opinion) !
Thx
YuriW
- Original Message -
From: Yuri Weinstein ywein...@redhat.com
To: Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org
Cc: Ceph Development
Hi,
QE approved
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commit/4178e32dd085adeead84fb168ab8a8a121256259
for release. The release notes should now be written based on the content of
the issues and pull requests mentioned here
http://workbench.dachary.org/ceph/ceph-backports/wikis/giant#already-merged
Clocks in the labs have seemed a lot less well-synced lately than they
had been previously. :( I think there was some issue and then a change
to the NTP configuration, but I'm not clear on the details.
-Greg
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 3:08 PM, David Zafman dzaf...@redhat.com wrote:
On 2 of my
On Fri, 20 Feb 2015, Loic Dachary wrote:
Hi,
QE approved
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commit/4178e32dd085adeead84fb168ab8a8a121256259
for release. The release notes should now be written based on the content of
the issues and pull requests mentioned here
On 2 of my rados thrash runs clocks out of sync. Is this an occasional
issue or did we have an infrastructure problem?
On burnupi19 and burnupi25:
2015-02-20 12:52:52.636017 mon.1 10.214.134.14:6789/0 177 : cluster
[WRN] message from mon.0 was stamped 0.501458s in the future, clocks not
David,
We had ntp server issue tot too long ago, could be the same or new
http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10675
Thx
YuriW
- Original Message -
From: David Zafman dzaf...@redhat.com
To: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2015 3:08:29 PM
Subject: Clocks out of sync
On
A recent test run had an EIO on the following disk:
plana74 /dev/sdb
The machine is locked right now.
David Zafman
Senior Developer
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe ceph-devel in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at
On Fri, 20 Feb 2015, Wyllys Ingersoll wrote:
Is there a way to disable the warning (shown when doing ceph -s, for
example) about the number of pgs (too few pgs per osd) ?
All of the PG-related warnings are tuanble:
OPTION(mon_pg_warn_min_per_osd, OPT_INT, 30) // min # pgs per (in) osd before
Is there a way to disable the warning (shown when doing ceph -s, for
example) about the number of pgs (too few pgs per osd) ?
Would it be considered risky to disable it?
Consider when a cluster is initially created with just a single pool,
and you don't anticipate that this pool will ever be
On Fri, 20 Feb 2015, Haomai Wang wrote:
So cool!
A little notes:
1. What about sync thread in NewStore?
My thought right now is that there will be a WAL thread and (maybe) a
transaction commit completion thread. What do you mean by sync thread?
One thing I want to avoid is the current
http://rhelblog.redhat.com/2015/01/12/mysteries-of-numa-memory-management-revealed/
It's possible that this could be having an effect on the results.
Isn't auto numa balancing enabled by default since kernel 3.8 ?
it can be checked with
cat /proc/sys/kernel/numa_balancing
- Mail
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hi Mark
On 20/02/15 15:51, Mark Nelson wrote:
I've CC'ed both Colin and Jay on this mail - so if anyone has
any specific questions about the testing they can chime in with
responses.
Good testing! Other than the NUMA questions in the other
I think paying attention to NUMA is good advice. One of the things that
apparently changed in RHEL7 is that they are now doing automatic NUMA
tuning:
http://rhelblog.redhat.com/2015/01/12/mysteries-of-numa-memory-management-revealed/
It's possible that this could be having an effect on the
On 02/20/2015 03:07 AM, James Page wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hi All
The Ubuntu Kernel team have spent the last few weeks investigating the
apparent performance disparity between RHEL 7 and Ubuntu 14.04; we've
focussed efforts in a few ways (see below).
All
On 02/20/2015 10:03 AM, Alexandre DERUMIER wrote:
http://rhelblog.redhat.com/2015/01/12/mysteries-of-numa-memory-management-revealed/
It's possible that this could be having an effect on the results.
Isn't auto numa balancing enabled by default since kernel 3.8 ?
No idea, I'm behind the
OK, I just viewed part of codes and realized it.
It looks like we want to sync metadata each time when WAL and we ahead
do_transaction jobs before WAL things. It may cause larger latency
than before? Because the latency of do_transactions couldn't be simply
ignore under some latency sensitive
Great, thanks!
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 11:15 AM, Sage Weil s...@newdream.net wrote:
On Fri, 20 Feb 2015, Wyllys Ingersoll wrote:
Is there a way to disable the warning (shown when doing ceph -s, for
example) about the number of pgs (too few pgs per osd) ?
All of the PG-related warnings are
On 02/20/2015 09:00 AM, Sage Weil wrote:
On Fri, 20 Feb 2015, Haomai Wang wrote:
So cool!
A little notes:
1. What about sync thread in NewStore?
My thought right now is that there will be a WAL thread and (maybe) a
transaction commit completion thread. What do you mean by sync thread?
I ran smart and it came back good, hmm
ubuntu@plana74:~$ /usr/libexec/smart.pl
All 4 drives happy as clams
Thx
YuriW
- Original Message -
From: David Zafman dzaf...@redhat.com
To: Sandon Van Ness svann...@redhat.com
Cc: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2015 1:10:48
Am 20.02.2015 um 17:03 schrieb Alexandre DERUMIER:
http://rhelblog.redhat.com/2015/01/12/mysteries-of-numa-memory-management-revealed/
It's possible that this could be having an effect on the results.
Isn't auto numa balancing enabled by default since kernel 3.8 ?
it can be checked with
cat
25 matches
Mail list logo
