Hi, try to mount with NFS version 3
That helpes in some cases. -- Mit freundlichen Gruessen / Best regards Oliver Dzombic Layer7 Networks mailto:i...@layer7.net Anschrift: Layer7 Networks GmbH Zum Sonnenberg 1-3 63571 Gelnhausen HRB 96293 beim Amtsgericht Hanau Geschäftsführung: Oliver Dzombic UST ID: DE259845632 On 18.11.24 03:22, 史洲洲 wrote:
Hi,Sorry, I need to send this mail again. This is the same question, only append the url for the images.I have tested the storage performance of my storage system using three different methods:1. Using the NFS protocol with a 10G network, on VMware ESXi, with a 4K block size and 100% sequential read operations.Url of this image: https://s2.loli.net/2024/11/18/WFsek69I3ZBblvQ.png <https://s2.loli.net/2024/11/18/WFsek69I3ZBblvQ.png>2. Using the NFS protocol with a 10G network, on Cloudstack, with a 4K block size and 100% sequential read operations.Mounted with these: '/vers=4.1,nconnect=16/' * Url of this image: https://s2.loli.net/2024/11/18/ a2WY3gpGVA6XeCO.png <https://s2.loli.net/2024/11/18/a2WY3gpGVA6XeCO.png>3. Using the FC protocol with 16G , on Cloudstack, treating the LUN accessed via FC as a local disk, with a 4K block size and 100% sequential read operations.Url of this image: https://s2.loli.net/2024/11/18/WFsek69I3ZBblvQ.png <https://s2.loli.net/2024/11/18/WFsek69I3ZBblvQ.png>The results show : with the same storage system, the average I/O response time is best (0.32) when using NFS with VMware ESXi. The second is FC-SAN with Cloudstack (1.25), and the worst is NFS with Cloudstack.Even the NFS with ESXi is better than fc-san?I believe there may be some configurations that could improve the storage performance when using Cloudstack. I would greatly appreciate it if anyone could offer some advice or solutions to help me optimize the Cloudstack storage performance.Thank you very much for your attention. Best regards. Leo.
OpenPGP_0x627BE440332A7AD0.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
