From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94B8DC2D0E2 for ; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 23:04:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED913221EB for ; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 23:04:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="f7lQSn9O" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org ED913221EB Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:55214 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kKrL5-0005or-T7 for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 19:04:47 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:34672) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kKrCq-0002GX-Es for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 18:56:16 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([63.128.21.124]:36459) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kKrCo-0001tP-5n for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 18:56:16 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1600815372; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=EpLwfAs7T6M1kuaa9lynFjNEFq3m3HyvU99buG9bmF0=; b=f7lQSn9O2Bo9qz5OlfUM2FuPl6r9gqLgnuQmZGD9TryGmSnRx17Rf+XbYiCJOpuAL4UvB2 mJhMnCelV79y4ijgKFubX7RVi6g+CHZ8QvR1VU7fnM3owbOkGFA2JbEx3DMHQ/PLfThvaj g5NylwANIkBW/baw3fy8lyM3vswXQ8U= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-382-6H6xGArGOaGMnmlUzFfsmg-1; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 18:56:10 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 6H6xGArGOaGMnmlUzFfsmg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BDE68425CE; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 22:56:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from horse.redhat.com (ovpn-116-78.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.116.78]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEC6F10021AA; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 22:56:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: by horse.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 10451) id D4D46223B13; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 18:56:02 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2020 18:56:02 -0400 From: Vivek Goyal To: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" Subject: Re: tools/virtiofs: Multi threading seems to hurt performance Message-ID: <20200922225602.GJ57620@redhat.com> References: <20200918213436.GA3520@redhat.com> <20200921201641.GD13362@redhat.com> <20200922110946.GB2836@work-vm> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200922110946.GB2836@work-vm> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.22 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=vgoyal@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Received-SPF: pass client-ip=63.128.21.124; envelope-from=vgoyal@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/09/22 02:07:04 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -35 X-Spam_score: -3.6 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-1.455, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: virtio-fs-list , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Stefan Hajnoczi , Miklos Szeredi Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 12:09:46PM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > Do you have the numbers for: > epool > epool thread-pool-size=1 > spool Hi David, Ok, I re-ran my numbers again after upgrading to latest qemu and also upgraded host kernel to latest upstream. Apart from comparing I epool, spool and 1Thread, I also ran their numa variants. That is I launched qemu and virtiofsd on node 0 of machine (numactl --cpunodebind=0). Results are kind of mixed. Here are my takeaways. - Running on same numa node improves performance overall for exclusive, shared and exclusive-1T mode. - In general both shared pool and exclusive-1T mode seem to perform better than exclusive mode, except for the case of randwrite-libaio. In some cases (seqread-libaio, seqwrite-libaio, seqwrite-libaio-multi) exclusive pool performs better than exclusive-1T. - Looks like in some cases exclusive-1T performs better than shared pool. (randwrite-libaio, randwrite-psync-multi, seqwrite-psync-multi, seqwrite-psync, seqread-libaio-multi, seqread-psync-multi) Overall, I feel that both exlusive-1T and shared perform better than exclusive pool. Results between exclusive-1T and shared pool are mixed. It seems like in many cases exclusve-1T performs better. I would say that moving to "shared" pool seems like a reasonable option. Thanks Vivek NAME WORKLOAD Bandwidth IOPS vtfs-none-epool seqread-psync 38(MiB/s) 9967 vtfs-none-epool-1T seqread-psync 66(MiB/s) 16k vtfs-none-spool seqread-psync 67(MiB/s) 16k vtfs-none-epool-numa seqread-psync 48(MiB/s) 12k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa seqread-psync 74(MiB/s) 18k vtfs-none-spool-numa seqread-psync 74(MiB/s) 18k vtfs-none-epool seqread-psync-multi 204(MiB/s) 51k vtfs-none-epool-1T seqread-psync-multi 325(MiB/s) 81k vtfs-none-spool seqread-psync-multi 271(MiB/s) 67k vtfs-none-epool-numa seqread-psync-multi 253(MiB/s) 63k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa seqread-psync-multi 349(MiB/s) 87k vtfs-none-spool-numa seqread-psync-multi 301(MiB/s) 75k vtfs-none-epool seqread-libaio 301(MiB/s) 75k vtfs-none-epool-1T seqread-libaio 273(MiB/s) 68k vtfs-none-spool seqread-libaio 334(MiB/s) 83k vtfs-none-epool-numa seqread-libaio 315(MiB/s) 78k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa seqread-libaio 326(MiB/s) 81k vtfs-none-spool-numa seqread-libaio 335(MiB/s) 83k vtfs-none-epool seqread-libaio-multi 202(MiB/s) 50k vtfs-none-epool-1T seqread-libaio-multi 308(MiB/s) 77k vtfs-none-spool seqread-libaio-multi 247(MiB/s) 61k vtfs-none-epool-numa seqread-libaio-multi 238(MiB/s) 59k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa seqread-libaio-multi 307(MiB/s) 76k vtfs-none-spool-numa seqread-libaio-multi 269(MiB/s) 67k vtfs-none-epool randread-psync 41(MiB/s) 10k vtfs-none-epool-1T randread-psync 67(MiB/s) 16k vtfs-none-spool randread-psync 64(MiB/s) 16k vtfs-none-epool-numa randread-psync 48(MiB/s) 12k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa randread-psync 73(MiB/s) 18k vtfs-none-spool-numa randread-psync 72(MiB/s) 18k vtfs-none-epool randread-psync-multi 207(MiB/s) 51k vtfs-none-epool-1T randread-psync-multi 313(MiB/s) 78k vtfs-none-spool randread-psync-multi 265(MiB/s) 66k vtfs-none-epool-numa randread-psync-multi 253(MiB/s) 63k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa randread-psync-multi 340(MiB/s) 85k vtfs-none-spool-numa randread-psync-multi 305(MiB/s) 76k vtfs-none-epool randread-libaio 305(MiB/s) 76k vtfs-none-epool-1T randread-libaio 308(MiB/s) 77k vtfs-none-spool randread-libaio 329(MiB/s) 82k vtfs-none-epool-numa randread-libaio 310(MiB/s) 77k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa randread-libaio 328(MiB/s) 82k vtfs-none-spool-numa randread-libaio 339(MiB/s) 84k vtfs-none-epool randread-libaio-multi 265(MiB/s) 66k vtfs-none-epool-1T randread-libaio-multi 267(MiB/s) 66k vtfs-none-spool randread-libaio-multi 269(MiB/s) 67k vtfs-none-epool-numa randread-libaio-multi 314(MiB/s) 78k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa randread-libaio-multi 319(MiB/s) 79k vtfs-none-spool-numa randread-libaio-multi 318(MiB/s) 79k vtfs-none-epool seqwrite-psync 36(MiB/s) 9224 vtfs-none-epool-1T seqwrite-psync 67(MiB/s) 16k vtfs-none-spool seqwrite-psync 61(MiB/s) 15k vtfs-none-epool-numa seqwrite-psync 44(MiB/s) 11k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa seqwrite-psync 69(MiB/s) 17k vtfs-none-spool-numa seqwrite-psync 68(MiB/s) 17k vtfs-none-epool seqwrite-psync-multi 193(MiB/s) 48k vtfs-none-epool-1T seqwrite-psync-multi 299(MiB/s) 74k vtfs-none-spool seqwrite-psync-multi 240(MiB/s) 60k vtfs-none-epool-numa seqwrite-psync-multi 233(MiB/s) 58k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa seqwrite-psync-multi 358(MiB/s) 89k vtfs-none-spool-numa seqwrite-psync-multi 285(MiB/s) 71k vtfs-none-epool seqwrite-libaio 265(MiB/s) 66k vtfs-none-epool-1T seqwrite-libaio 245(MiB/s) 61k vtfs-none-spool seqwrite-libaio 312(MiB/s) 78k vtfs-none-epool-numa seqwrite-libaio 295(MiB/s) 73k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa seqwrite-libaio 282(MiB/s) 70k vtfs-none-spool-numa seqwrite-libaio 297(MiB/s) 74k vtfs-none-epool seqwrite-libaio-multi 313(MiB/s) 78k vtfs-none-epool-1T seqwrite-libaio-multi 299(MiB/s) 74k vtfs-none-spool seqwrite-libaio-multi 315(MiB/s) 78k vtfs-none-epool-numa seqwrite-libaio-multi 318(MiB/s) 79k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa seqwrite-libaio-multi 410(MiB/s) 102k vtfs-none-spool-numa seqwrite-libaio-multi 378(MiB/s) 94k vtfs-none-epool randwrite-psync 33(MiB/s) 8629 vtfs-none-epool-1T randwrite-psync 61(MiB/s) 15k vtfs-none-spool randwrite-psync 63(MiB/s) 15k vtfs-none-epool-numa randwrite-psync 49(MiB/s) 12k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa randwrite-psync 68(MiB/s) 17k vtfs-none-spool-numa randwrite-psync 66(MiB/s) 16k vtfs-none-epool randwrite-psync-multi 186(MiB/s) 46k vtfs-none-epool-1T randwrite-psync-multi 300(MiB/s) 75k vtfs-none-spool randwrite-psync-multi 233(MiB/s) 58k vtfs-none-epool-numa randwrite-psync-multi 235(MiB/s) 58k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa randwrite-psync-multi 355(MiB/s) 88k vtfs-none-spool-numa randwrite-psync-multi 266(MiB/s) 66k vtfs-none-epool randwrite-libaio 289(MiB/s) 72k vtfs-none-epool-1T randwrite-libaio 284(MiB/s) 71k vtfs-none-spool randwrite-libaio 278(MiB/s) 69k vtfs-none-epool-numa randwrite-libaio 292(MiB/s) 73k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa randwrite-libaio 294(MiB/s) 73k vtfs-none-spool-numa randwrite-libaio 290(MiB/s) 72k vtfs-none-epool randwrite-libaio-multi 317(MiB/s) 79k vtfs-none-epool-1T randwrite-libaio-multi 323(MiB/s) 80k vtfs-none-spool randwrite-libaio-multi 330(MiB/s) 82k vtfs-none-epool-numa randwrite-libaio-multi 315(MiB/s) 78k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa randwrite-libaio-multi 409(MiB/s) 102k vtfs-none-spool-numa randwrite-libaio-multi 384(MiB/s) 96k From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2020 18:56:02 -0400 From: Vivek Goyal Message-ID: <20200922225602.GJ57620@redhat.com> References: <20200918213436.GA3520@redhat.com> <20200921201641.GD13362@redhat.com> <20200922110946.GB2836@work-vm> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200922110946.GB2836@work-vm> Subject: Re: [Virtio-fs] tools/virtiofs: Multi threading seems to hurt performance List-Id: Development discussions about virtio-fs List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" Cc: virtio-fs-list , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Miklos Szeredi On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 12:09:46PM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > Do you have the numbers for: > epool > epool thread-pool-size=1 > spool Hi David, Ok, I re-ran my numbers again after upgrading to latest qemu and also upgraded host kernel to latest upstream. Apart from comparing I epool, spool and 1Thread, I also ran their numa variants. That is I launched qemu and virtiofsd on node 0 of machine (numactl --cpunodebind=0). Results are kind of mixed. Here are my takeaways. - Running on same numa node improves performance overall for exclusive, shared and exclusive-1T mode. - In general both shared pool and exclusive-1T mode seem to perform better than exclusive mode, except for the case of randwrite-libaio. In some cases (seqread-libaio, seqwrite-libaio, seqwrite-libaio-multi) exclusive pool performs better than exclusive-1T. - Looks like in some cases exclusive-1T performs better than shared pool. (randwrite-libaio, randwrite-psync-multi, seqwrite-psync-multi, seqwrite-psync, seqread-libaio-multi, seqread-psync-multi) Overall, I feel that both exlusive-1T and shared perform better than exclusive pool. Results between exclusive-1T and shared pool are mixed. It seems like in many cases exclusve-1T performs better. I would say that moving to "shared" pool seems like a reasonable option. Thanks Vivek NAME WORKLOAD Bandwidth IOPS vtfs-none-epool seqread-psync 38(MiB/s) 9967 vtfs-none-epool-1T seqread-psync 66(MiB/s) 16k vtfs-none-spool seqread-psync 67(MiB/s) 16k vtfs-none-epool-numa seqread-psync 48(MiB/s) 12k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa seqread-psync 74(MiB/s) 18k vtfs-none-spool-numa seqread-psync 74(MiB/s) 18k vtfs-none-epool seqread-psync-multi 204(MiB/s) 51k vtfs-none-epool-1T seqread-psync-multi 325(MiB/s) 81k vtfs-none-spool seqread-psync-multi 271(MiB/s) 67k vtfs-none-epool-numa seqread-psync-multi 253(MiB/s) 63k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa seqread-psync-multi 349(MiB/s) 87k vtfs-none-spool-numa seqread-psync-multi 301(MiB/s) 75k vtfs-none-epool seqread-libaio 301(MiB/s) 75k vtfs-none-epool-1T seqread-libaio 273(MiB/s) 68k vtfs-none-spool seqread-libaio 334(MiB/s) 83k vtfs-none-epool-numa seqread-libaio 315(MiB/s) 78k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa seqread-libaio 326(MiB/s) 81k vtfs-none-spool-numa seqread-libaio 335(MiB/s) 83k vtfs-none-epool seqread-libaio-multi 202(MiB/s) 50k vtfs-none-epool-1T seqread-libaio-multi 308(MiB/s) 77k vtfs-none-spool seqread-libaio-multi 247(MiB/s) 61k vtfs-none-epool-numa seqread-libaio-multi 238(MiB/s) 59k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa seqread-libaio-multi 307(MiB/s) 76k vtfs-none-spool-numa seqread-libaio-multi 269(MiB/s) 67k vtfs-none-epool randread-psync 41(MiB/s) 10k vtfs-none-epool-1T randread-psync 67(MiB/s) 16k vtfs-none-spool randread-psync 64(MiB/s) 16k vtfs-none-epool-numa randread-psync 48(MiB/s) 12k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa randread-psync 73(MiB/s) 18k vtfs-none-spool-numa randread-psync 72(MiB/s) 18k vtfs-none-epool randread-psync-multi 207(MiB/s) 51k vtfs-none-epool-1T randread-psync-multi 313(MiB/s) 78k vtfs-none-spool randread-psync-multi 265(MiB/s) 66k vtfs-none-epool-numa randread-psync-multi 253(MiB/s) 63k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa randread-psync-multi 340(MiB/s) 85k vtfs-none-spool-numa randread-psync-multi 305(MiB/s) 76k vtfs-none-epool randread-libaio 305(MiB/s) 76k vtfs-none-epool-1T randread-libaio 308(MiB/s) 77k vtfs-none-spool randread-libaio 329(MiB/s) 82k vtfs-none-epool-numa randread-libaio 310(MiB/s) 77k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa randread-libaio 328(MiB/s) 82k vtfs-none-spool-numa randread-libaio 339(MiB/s) 84k vtfs-none-epool randread-libaio-multi 265(MiB/s) 66k vtfs-none-epool-1T randread-libaio-multi 267(MiB/s) 66k vtfs-none-spool randread-libaio-multi 269(MiB/s) 67k vtfs-none-epool-numa randread-libaio-multi 314(MiB/s) 78k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa randread-libaio-multi 319(MiB/s) 79k vtfs-none-spool-numa randread-libaio-multi 318(MiB/s) 79k vtfs-none-epool seqwrite-psync 36(MiB/s) 9224 vtfs-none-epool-1T seqwrite-psync 67(MiB/s) 16k vtfs-none-spool seqwrite-psync 61(MiB/s) 15k vtfs-none-epool-numa seqwrite-psync 44(MiB/s) 11k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa seqwrite-psync 69(MiB/s) 17k vtfs-none-spool-numa seqwrite-psync 68(MiB/s) 17k vtfs-none-epool seqwrite-psync-multi 193(MiB/s) 48k vtfs-none-epool-1T seqwrite-psync-multi 299(MiB/s) 74k vtfs-none-spool seqwrite-psync-multi 240(MiB/s) 60k vtfs-none-epool-numa seqwrite-psync-multi 233(MiB/s) 58k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa seqwrite-psync-multi 358(MiB/s) 89k vtfs-none-spool-numa seqwrite-psync-multi 285(MiB/s) 71k vtfs-none-epool seqwrite-libaio 265(MiB/s) 66k vtfs-none-epool-1T seqwrite-libaio 245(MiB/s) 61k vtfs-none-spool seqwrite-libaio 312(MiB/s) 78k vtfs-none-epool-numa seqwrite-libaio 295(MiB/s) 73k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa seqwrite-libaio 282(MiB/s) 70k vtfs-none-spool-numa seqwrite-libaio 297(MiB/s) 74k vtfs-none-epool seqwrite-libaio-multi 313(MiB/s) 78k vtfs-none-epool-1T seqwrite-libaio-multi 299(MiB/s) 74k vtfs-none-spool seqwrite-libaio-multi 315(MiB/s) 78k vtfs-none-epool-numa seqwrite-libaio-multi 318(MiB/s) 79k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa seqwrite-libaio-multi 410(MiB/s) 102k vtfs-none-spool-numa seqwrite-libaio-multi 378(MiB/s) 94k vtfs-none-epool randwrite-psync 33(MiB/s) 8629 vtfs-none-epool-1T randwrite-psync 61(MiB/s) 15k vtfs-none-spool randwrite-psync 63(MiB/s) 15k vtfs-none-epool-numa randwrite-psync 49(MiB/s) 12k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa randwrite-psync 68(MiB/s) 17k vtfs-none-spool-numa randwrite-psync 66(MiB/s) 16k vtfs-none-epool randwrite-psync-multi 186(MiB/s) 46k vtfs-none-epool-1T randwrite-psync-multi 300(MiB/s) 75k vtfs-none-spool randwrite-psync-multi 233(MiB/s) 58k vtfs-none-epool-numa randwrite-psync-multi 235(MiB/s) 58k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa randwrite-psync-multi 355(MiB/s) 88k vtfs-none-spool-numa randwrite-psync-multi 266(MiB/s) 66k vtfs-none-epool randwrite-libaio 289(MiB/s) 72k vtfs-none-epool-1T randwrite-libaio 284(MiB/s) 71k vtfs-none-spool randwrite-libaio 278(MiB/s) 69k vtfs-none-epool-numa randwrite-libaio 292(MiB/s) 73k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa randwrite-libaio 294(MiB/s) 73k vtfs-none-spool-numa randwrite-libaio 290(MiB/s) 72k vtfs-none-epool randwrite-libaio-multi 317(MiB/s) 79k vtfs-none-epool-1T randwrite-libaio-multi 323(MiB/s) 80k vtfs-none-spool randwrite-libaio-multi 330(MiB/s) 82k vtfs-none-epool-numa randwrite-libaio-multi 315(MiB/s) 78k vtfs-none-epool-1T-numa randwrite-libaio-multi 409(MiB/s) 102k vtfs-none-spool-numa randwrite-libaio-multi 384(MiB/s) 96k