I suppose Andrija says about the volume size, it should be much bigger than
storage host RAM.

2 февр. 2018 г. 10:17 ПП пользователь "S. Brüseke - proIO GmbH" <
s.brues...@proio.com> написал:

> Hi Andrija,
>
> you are right, of course it is Samsung PM1633a. I am not sure if this is
> really only RAM. I let the fio command run for more than 30min and IOPS did
> not drop.
> I am using 6 SSDs in my setup, each has 35.000 IOPS random write max, so
> ScaleIO can do 210.000 IOPS (read) at its best. fio shows around 140.000
> IOPS (read) max. ScaleIO GUI shows me around 45.000 IOPS (read/write
> combined) per SSD.
>
> Do you have a different fio command I can run?
>
> Mit freundlichen Grüßen / With kind regards,
>
> Swen
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Andrija Panic [mailto:andrija.pa...@gmail.com]
> Gesendet: Freitag, 2. Februar 2018 16:04
> An: users <users@cloudstack.apache.org>
> Cc: S. Brüseke - proIO GmbH <s.brues...@proio.com>
> Betreff: Re: AW: AW: KVM storage cluster
>
> From my extremely short reading on ScaleIO few months ago, they are
> utilizing RAM or similar for write caching, so basically, you write to RAM
> or other part of ultra fast temp memory (NVME,etc) and later it is flushed
> to durable part of storage.
>
> I assume its 1633a not 1663a ? -
> http://www.samsung.com/semiconductor/ssd/enterprise-ssd/MZILS1T9HEJH/ (
> ?) This one can barely do 35K IOPS of write per spec... and based on my
> humble experience with Samsung, you can hardly ever reach that
> specification, even with locally attached SSD and a lot of CPU
> available...(local filesystem)
>
> So it must be RAM writing for sure...so make sure you saturate the
> benchmark enough, so that the flushing process kicks in, and that the
> benchmark will make sense when you later have constant IO load on the
> cluster.
>
> Cheers
>
>
> On 2 February 2018 at 15:56, Ivan Kudryavtsev <kudryavtsev...@bw-sw.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Swen, performance looks awesome, but still wonder where is the magic
> > here, because AFAIK Ceph is not capable to even touch the base, but
> > Red Hat bets on it... Might it be the ScaleIO doesn't wait while the
> > replication complete for IO or other hack is used?
> >
> > 2 февр. 2018 г. 3:19 ПП пользователь "S. Brüseke - proIO GmbH" <
> > s.brues...@proio.com> написал:
> >
> > > 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.
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
> 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.
>
>
>

Reply via email to