On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 8:04 AM, Danny Al-Gaaf <danny.al-gaaf-2YacvwyR+KOzQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am 28.02.2014 03:45, schrieb Haomai Wang:
> [...]
>> I use fio which rbd supported from
>> TelekomCloud(https://github.com/TelekomCloud/fio/commits/rbd-engine)
>> to test rbd.
>
> I would recommend to no longer use this branch, it's outdated. The rbd
> engine got contributed back to upstream fio and is now merged [1]. For
> more information read [2].
>
> [1] https://github.com/axboe/fio/commits/master
> [2]
> http://telekomcloud.github.io/ceph/2014/02/26/ceph-performance-analysis_fio_rbd.html
>
>>
>> The fio command: fio -direct=1 -iodepth=64 -thread -rw=randwrite
>> -ioengine=rbd -bs=4k -size=19G -numjobs=1 -runtime=100
>> -group_reporting -name=ebs_test -pool=openstack -rbdname=image
>> -clientname=fio -invalidate=0
>
> Don't use runtime and size at the same time, since runtime limits the
> size. What we normally do we let the fio job fill up the whole rbd or we
> limit it only via runtime.
>
>> ============================================
>>
>> FileStore result:
>> ebs_test: (g=0): rw=randwrite, bs=4K-4K/4K-4K/4K-4K, ioengine=rbd, iodepth=64
>> fio-2.1.4
>> Starting 1 thread
>> rbd engine: RBD version: 0.1.8
>>
>> ebs_test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=30886: Thu Feb 27 08:09:18 2014
>>   write: io=283040KB, bw=6403.4KB/s, iops=1600, runt= 44202msec
>>     slat (usec): min=116, max=2817, avg=195.78, stdev=56.45
>>     clat (msec): min=8, max=661, avg=39.57, stdev=29.26
>>      lat (msec): min=9, max=661, avg=39.77, stdev=29.25
>>     clat percentiles (msec):
>>      |  1.00th=[   15],  5.00th=[   20], 10.00th=[   23], 20.00th=[   28],
>>      | 30.00th=[   31], 40.00th=[   35], 50.00th=[   37], 60.00th=[   40],
>>      | 70.00th=[   43], 80.00th=[   46], 90.00th=[   51], 95.00th=[   58],
>>      | 99.00th=[  128], 99.50th=[  210], 99.90th=[  457], 99.95th=[  494],
>>      | 99.99th=[  545]
>>     bw (KB  /s): min= 2120, max=12656, per=100.00%, avg=6464.27, stdev=1726.55
>>     lat (msec) : 10=0.01%, 20=5.91%, 50=83.35%, 100=8.88%, 250=1.47%
>>     lat (msec) : 500=0.34%, 750=0.05%
>>   cpu          : usr=29.83%, sys=1.36%, ctx=84002, majf=0, minf=216
>>   IO depths    : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=17.4%, >=64=82.6%
>>      submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
>>      complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=99.1%, 8=0.5%, 16=0.3%, 32=0.1%, 64=0.1%, >=64=0.0%
>>      issued    : total=r=0/w=70760/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0
>>      latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=64
>>
>> Run status group 0 (all jobs):
>>   WRITE: io=283040KB, aggrb=6403KB/s, minb=6403KB/s, maxb=6403KB/s,
>> mint=44202msec, maxt=44202msec
>>
>> Disk stats (read/write):
>>   sdb: ios=5/9512, merge=0/69, ticks=4/10649, in_queue=10645, util=0.92%
>>
>> ===============================================
>>
>> KeyValueStore:
>> ebs_test: (g=0): rw=randwrite, bs=4K-4K/4K-4K/4K-4K, ioengine=rbd, iodepth=64
>> fio-2.1.4
>> Starting 1 thread
>> rbd engine: RBD version: 0.1.8
>>
>> ebs_test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=29137: Thu Feb 27 08:06:30 2014
>>   write: io=444376KB, bw=6280.2KB/s, iops=1570, runt= 70759msec
>>     slat (usec): min=122, max=3237, avg=184.51, stdev=37.76
>>     clat (msec): min=10, max=168, avg=40.57, stdev= 5.70
>>      lat (msec): min=11, max=168, avg=40.75, stdev= 5.71
>>     clat percentiles (msec):
>>      |  1.00th=[   34],  5.00th=[   37], 10.00th=[   39], 20.00th=[   39],
>>      | 30.00th=[   40], 40.00th=[   40], 50.00th=[   41], 60.00th=[   41],
>>      | 70.00th=[   42], 80.00th=[   42], 90.00th=[   44], 95.00th=[   45],
>>      | 99.00th=[   48], 99.50th=[   50], 99.90th=[  163], 99.95th=[  167],
>>      | 99.99th=[  167]
>>     bw (KB  /s): min= 4590, max= 7480, per=100.00%, avg=6285.69, stdev=374.22
>>     lat (msec) : 20=0.02%, 50=99.58%, 100=0.23%, 250=0.17%
>>   cpu          : usr=29.11%, sys=1.10%, ctx=118564, majf=0, minf=194
>>   IO depths    : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=0.7%, >=64=99.3%
>>      submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
>>      complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.1%, >=64=0.0%
>>      issued    : total=r=0/w=111094/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0
>>      latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=64
>>
>> Run status group 0 (all jobs):
>>   WRITE: io=444376KB, aggrb=6280KB/s, minb=6280KB/s, maxb=6280KB/s,
>> mint=70759msec, maxt=70759msec
>>
>> Disk stats (read/write):
>>   sdb: ios=0/15936, merge=0/272, ticks=0/17157, in_queue=17146, util=0.94%
>>
>>
>> It's just a simple test, maybe exist some misleadings on the config or
>> results. But
>> we can obviously see the conspicuous improvement for KeyValueStore.
>
> The numbers are hard to compare. Since the tests wrote a different
> amount of data. This could influence the numbers.
>
> Do you mean improvements compared to former implementation or to FileStore?
>
> Without a retest with the latest fio rbd engine: there is not so much
> difference between KVS and FS atm.
>
> Btw. Nice to see the rbd engine is useful to others ;-)

Thanks for your advise and jobs on fio-rbd. :)

The test isn't preciseness and just a simple test to show the progress
of kvstore.

>
> Regards
>
> Danny



--
Best Regards,

Wheat

_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users-idqoXFIVOFJgJs9I8MT0rw@public.gmane.org
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com