Hi Ivan, it is a 50/50 read-write mix. Here is the fio command I used: fio --name=test --readwrite=randrw --rwmixwrite=50 --bs=4k --invalidate=1 --group_reporting --direct=1 --filename=/dev/scinia --time_based --runtime=9999 --ioengine=libaio --numjobs=4 --iodepth=256 --norandommap --randrepeat=0 –exitall Result was: IO Workload 274.000 IOPS 1,0 GB/s transfer Read Bandwith 536MB/s Read IOPS 137.000 Write Bandwith 536MB/s Write IOPS 137.000 If you want me to run a different fio command just send it. My lab is still running. Any idea how I can mount my ScaleIO volume in KVM? Mit freundlichen Grüßen / With kind regards, Swen Von: Ivan Kudryavtsev [mailto:kudryavtsev...@bw-sw.com] Gesendet: Freitag, 2. Februar 2018 02:58 An: users@cloudstack.apache.org; S. Brüseke - proIO GmbH <s.brues...@proio.com> Betreff: Re: AW: KVM storage cluster Hi, Swen. Do you test with direct or cached ops or buffered ones? Is it a write test or rw with certain rw percenrage? Hardly believe the deployment can do 250k IOs for writting with single VM test. 2 февр. 2018 г. 4:56 пользователь "S. Brüseke - proIO GmbH" <s.brues...@proio.com> написал: I am also testing with ScaleIO on CentOS7 with KVM. With a 3 node cluster with each node has 2x 2TB SSD (Samsung PM1663a) I get 250.000 IOPS when doing a fio test (random 4k). The only problem is that I do not know how to mount the shared volume so that KVM can use it to store vms on it. Does anyone know how to do it?
Mit freundlichen Grüßen / With kind regards, Swen -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Andrija Panic [mailto:andrija.pa...@gmail.com] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 1. Februar 2018 22:00 An: users <users@cloudstack.apache.org> Betreff: Re: KVM storage cluster a bit late, but: - for any IO heavy (medium even...) workload, try to avoid CEPH, no offence, simply it takes lot of $$$ to make CEPH perform in random IO worlds (imagine RHEL and vendors provide only refernce architecutre with SEQUNATIAL benchmark workload, not random) - not to mention a huge list of bugs we hit back in the days (simply, one/single great guy handled the CEPH integration for CloudStack, but otherwise not lot of help from other committers, if not mistaken, afaik...) - NFS better performance but not magic... (but most well supported, code wise, bug-less wise :) - and for top notch (cost some $$$) SolidFire is the way to go (we have tons of IO heavy customers, so this THE solution really, after living with CEPH, then NFS on SSDs, etc) and provides guarantied IOPS etc... Cheers. On 7 January 2018 at 22:46, Grégoire Lamodière <g.lamodi...@dimsi.fr> wrote: > Hi Vahric, > > Thank you. I will have a look on it. > > Grégoire > > > > Envoyé depuis mon smartphone Samsung Galaxy. > > > -------- Message d'origine -------- > De : Vahric MUHTARYAN <vah...@doruk.net.tr> Date : 07/01/2018 21:08 > (GMT+01:00) À : users@cloudstack.apache.org Objet : Re: KVM storage > cluster > > Hello Grégoire, > > I suggest you to look EMC scaleio for block based operations. It has a > free one too ! And as a block working better then Ceph ;) > > Regards > VM > > On 7.01.2018 18:12, "Grégoire Lamodière" <g.lamodi...@dimsi.fr> wrote: > > Hi Ivan, > > Thank you for your quick reply. > > I'll have a look on Ceph and related perfs. > As you mentionned, 2 DRDB nfs servers can do the job, but if I can > avoid using 2 blades for just passing blocks to nfs, this is even > better (and maintain them as well). > > Thanks for pointing to ceph. > > Grégoire > > > > > --- > Grégoire Lamodière > T/ + 33 6 76 27 03 31 > F/ + 33 1 75 43 89 71 > > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Ivan Kudryavtsev [mailto:kudryavtsev...@bw-sw.com] > Envoyé : dimanche 7 janvier 2018 15:20 > À : users@cloudstack.apache.org > Objet : Re: KVM storage cluster > > Hi, Grégoire, > You could have > - local storage if you like, so every compute node could have own > space (one lun per host) > - to have Ceph deployed on the same compute nodes (distribute raw > devices among nodes) > - to dedicate certain node as NFS server (or two servers with > DRBD) > > I don't think that shared FS is a good option, even clustered LVM > is a big pain. > > 2018-01-07 21:08 GMT+07:00 Grégoire Lamodière <g.lamodi...@dimsi.fr>: > > > Dear all, > > > > Since Citrix changed deeply the free version of XenServer 7.3, I > am in > > the process of Pocing moving our Xen clusters to KVM on Centos 7 I > > decided to use HP blades connected to HP P2000 over mutipath SAS > links. > > > > The network part seems fine to me, not so far from what we used to do > > with Xen. > > About the storage, I am a little but confused about the shared > > mountpoint storage option offerds by CS. > > > > What would be the good option, in terms of CS, to create a cluster fs > > using my SAS array ? > > I read somewhere (a Dag SlideShare I think) that GFS2 is the only > > clustered FS supported by CS. Is it still correct ? > > Does it mean I have to create the GFS2 cluster, make identical mount > > conf on all host, and use it on CS as NFS ? > > I do not have to add the storage to KVM prior CS zone creation ? > > > > Thanks a lot for any help / information. > > > > --- > > Grégoire Lamodière > > T/ + 33 6 76 27 03 31 > > F/ + 33 1 75 43 89 71 > > > > > > > -- > With best regards, Ivan Kudryavtsev > Bitworks Software, Ltd. > Cell: +7-923-414-1515 > WWW: http://bitworks.software/ <http://bw-sw.com/> > > > > -- Andrija Panić - proIO GmbH - Geschäftsführer: Swen Brüseke Sitz der Gesellschaft: Frankfurt am Main USt-IdNr. DE 267 075 918 Registergericht: Frankfurt am Main - HRB 86239 Diese E-Mail enthält vertrauliche und/oder rechtlich geschützte Informationen. Wenn Sie nicht der richtige Adressat sind oder diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, informieren Sie bitte sofort den Absender und vernichten Sie diese Mail. Das unerlaubte Kopieren sowie die unbefugte Weitergabe dieser Mail sind nicht gestattet. This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. - proIO GmbH - Geschäftsführer: Swen Brüseke Sitz der Gesellschaft: Frankfurt am Main USt-IdNr. DE 267 075 918 Registergericht: Frankfurt am Main - HRB 86239 Diese E-Mail enthält vertrauliche und/oder rechtlich geschützte Informationen. Wenn Sie nicht der richtige Adressat sind oder diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, informieren Sie bitte sofort den Absender und vernichten Sie diese Mail. Das unerlaubte Kopieren sowie die unbefugte Weitergabe dieser Mail sind nicht gestattet. This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden.
