thr3ads.net - Gluster users - [Gluster-users] GlusterFS 3.7

If this information is useful, please help other people find it:
Share via:

Geoffrey Letessier

2015-Jun-01 21:52 UTC

[Gluster-users] GlusterFS 3.7 - slow/poor performances

Dear all,

I have a crash test cluster where i?ve tested the new version of GlusterFS
(v3.7) before upgrading my HPC cluster in production.
But? all my tests show me very very low performances.

For my benches, as you can read below, I do some actions (untar, du, find, tar,
rm) with linux kernel sources, dropping cache, each on distributed, replicated,
distributed-replicated, single (single brick) volumes and the native FS of one
brick.

# time (echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches; tar xJf ~/linux-4.1-rc5.tar.xz;
sync; echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches)
# time (echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches; du -sh linux-4.1-rc5/; echo 3 >
/proc/sys/vm/drop_caches)
# time (echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches; find linux-4.1-rc5/|wc -l; echo 3
> /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches)
# time (echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches; tar czf linux-4.1-rc5.tgz
linux-4.1-rc5/; echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches)
# time (echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches; rm -rf linux-4.1-rc5.tgz
linux-4.1-rc5/; echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches)

And here are the process times:

---------------------------------------------------------------
|             |  UNTAR  |   DU   |  FIND   |   TAR   |   RM   |
---------------------------------------------------------------
| single      |  ~3m45s |   ~43s |    ~47s |  ~3m10s | ~3m15s |
---------------------------------------------------------------
| replicated  |  ~5m10s |   ~59s |   ~1m6s |  ~1m19s | ~1m49s |
---------------------------------------------------------------
| distributed |  ~4m18s |   ~41s |    ~57s |  ~2m24s | ~1m38s |
---------------------------------------------------------------
| dist-repl   |  ~8m18s |  ~1m4s |  ~1m11s |  ~1m24s | ~2m40s |
---------------------------------------------------------------
| native FS   |    ~11s |    ~4s |     ~2s |    ~56s |   ~10s |
---------------------------------------------------------------

I get the same results, whether with default configurations with custom
configurations.

if I look at the side of the ifstat command, I can note my IO write processes
never exceed 3MBs...

EXT4 native FS seems to be faster (roughly 15-20% but no more) than XFS one

My [test] storage cluster config is composed by 2 identical servers (biCPU Intel
Xeon X5355, 8GB of RAM, 2x2TB HDD (no-RAID) and Gb ethernet)

My volume settings:
	single: 1server 1 brick
	replicated: 2 servers 1 brick each
	distributed: 2 servers 2 bricks each
	dist-repl: 2 bricks in the same server and replica 2

All seems to be OK in gluster status command line.

Do you have an idea why I obtain so bad results?
Thanks in advance.
Geoffrey
-----------------------------------------------
Geoffrey Letessier

Responsable informatique & ing?nieur syst?me
CNRS - UPR 9080 - Laboratoire de Biochimie Th?orique
Institut de Biologie Physico-Chimique
13, rue Pierre et Marie Curie - 75005 Paris
Tel: 01 58 41 50 93 - eMail: geoffrey.letessier at cnrs.fr

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20150601/ca0a21de/attachment.html>

Pranith Kumar Karampuri

2015-Jun-02 08:09 UTC

head link

[Gluster-users] GlusterFS 3.7 - slow/poor performances

hi Geoffrey,
              Since you are saying it happens on all types of volumes, 
lets do the following:
1) Create a dist-repl volume
2) Set the options etc you need.
3) enable gluster volume profile using "gluster volume profile
<volname>
start"
4) run the work load
5) give output of "gluster volume profile <volname> info"

Repeat the steps above on new and old version you are comparing this 
with. That should give us insight into what could be causing the slowness.

Pranith
On 06/02/2015 03:22 AM, Geoffrey Letessier wrote:> Dear all,
>
> I have a crash test cluster where i?ve tested the new version of 
> GlusterFS (v3.7) before upgrading my HPC cluster in production.
> But? all my tests show me very very low performances.
>
> For my benches, as you can read below, I do some actions (untar, du, 
> find, tar, rm) with linux kernel sources, dropping cache, each on 
> distributed, replicated, distributed-replicated, single (single brick) 
> volumes and the native FS of one brick.
>
> # time (echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches; tar xJf 
> ~/linux-4.1-rc5.tar.xz; sync; echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches)
> # time (echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches; du -sh linux-4.1-rc5/; echo 
> 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches)
> # time (echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches; find linux-4.1-rc5/|wc -l; 
> echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches)
> # time (echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches; tar czf linux-4.1-rc5.tgz 
> linux-4.1-rc5/; echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches)
> # time (echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches; rm -rf linux-4.1-rc5.tgz 
> linux-4.1-rc5/; echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches)
>
> And here are the process times:
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> |             |  UNTAR  |   DU   |  FIND   |   TAR   |   RM   |
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> | single      |  ~3m45s |   ~43s |    ~47s | ~3m10s | ~3m15s |
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> | replicated  |  ~5m10s |   ~59s |   ~1m6s | ~1m19s | ~1m49s |
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> | distributed |  ~4m18s |   ~41s |    ~57s | ~2m24s | ~1m38s |
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> | dist-repl   |  ~8m18s |  ~1m4s |  ~1m11s | ~1m24s | ~2m40s |
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> | native FS   |    ~11s |    ~4s |     ~2s | ~56s |   ~10s |
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I get the same results, whether with default configurations with 
> custom configurations.
>
> if I look at the side of the ifstat command, I can note my IO write 
> processes never exceed 3MBs...
>
> EXT4 native FS seems to be faster (roughly 15-20% but no more) than 
> XFS one
>
> My [test] storage cluster config is composed by 2 identical servers 
> (biCPU Intel Xeon X5355, 8GB of RAM, 2x2TB HDD (no-RAID) and Gb ethernet)
>
> My volume settings:
> single: 1server 1 brick
> replicated: 2 servers 1 brick each
> distributed: 2 servers 2 bricks each
> dist-repl: 2 bricks in the same server and replica 2
>
> All seems to be OK in gluster status command line.
>
> Do you have an idea why I obtain so bad results?
> Thanks in advance.
> Geoffrey
> -----------------------------------------------
> Geoffrey Letessier
>
> Responsable informatique & ing?nieur syst?me
> CNRS - UPR 9080 - Laboratoire de Biochimie Th?orique
> Institut de Biologie Physico-Chimique
> 13, rue Pierre et Marie Curie - 75005 Paris
> Tel: 01 58 41 50 93 - eMail: geoffrey.letessier at cnrs.fr 
> <mailto:geoffrey.letessier at cnrs.fr>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users at gluster.org
> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20150602/7ba5ae21/attachment.html>

Possibly Parallel Threads

Search for more apparently analagous threads

Gluster users - Jun 2015 - GlusterFS 3.7 - slow/poor performances

[Gluster-users] GlusterFS 3.7 - slow/poor performances

[Gluster-users] GlusterFS 3.7 - slow/poor performances

Possibly Parallel Threads