[ceph-users] Benchmark performance when using SSD as the journal

Dave.Chen at Dell.com Dave.Chen at Dell.com
Tue Nov 13 22:27:59 PST 2018


Thanks Martin for your suggestion!
I will definitely try bluestore later. The version of Ceph I am using is v10.2.10 Jewel, do you think it’s stable enough to use Bluestore for Jewel or should I upgrade Ceph to Luminous?


Best Regards,
Dave Chen

From: Martin Verges <martin.verges at croit.io>
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 1:49 PM
To: Chen2, Dave
Cc: singapore at amerrick.co.uk; ceph-users
Subject: Re: [ceph-users] Benchmark performance when using SSD as the journal


[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Please report any suspicious attachments, links, or requests for sensitive information.
Please never use the Datasheet values to select your SSD. We never had a single one that that delivers the shown perfomance in a Ceph Journal use case.

However, do not use Filestore anymore. Especialy with newer kernel versions. Use Bluestore instead.
--
Martin Verges
Managing director

Mobile: +49 174 9335695
E-Mail: martin.verges at croit.io<mailto:martin.verges at croit.io>
Chat: https://t.me/MartinVerges

croit GmbH, Freseniusstr. 31h, 81247 Munich
CEO: Martin Verges - VAT-ID: DE310638492
Com. register: Amtsgericht Munich HRB 231263

Web: https://croit.io
YouTube: https://goo.gl/PGE1Bx

Am Mi., 14. Nov. 2018, 05:46 hat <Dave.Chen at dell.com<mailto:Dave.Chen at dell.com>> geschrieben:
Thanks Merrick!

I checked with Intel spec [1], the performance Intel said is,

•  Sequential Read (up to) 500 MB/s
•  Sequential Write (up to) 330 MB/s
•  Random Read (100% Span) 72000 IOPS
•  Random Write (100% Span) 20000 IOPS

I think these indicator should be must better than general HDD, and I have run read/write commands with “rados bench” respectively,   there should be some difference.

And is there any kinds of configuration that could give us any performance gain with this SSD (Intel S4500)?

[1] https://ark.intel.com/products/120521/Intel-SSD-DC-S4500-Series-480GB-2-5in-SATA-6Gb-s-3D1-TLC-

Best Regards,
Dave Chen

From: Ashley Merrick <singapore at amerrick.co.uk<mailto:singapore at amerrick.co.uk>>
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 12:30 PM
To: Chen2, Dave
Cc: ceph-users
Subject: Re: [ceph-users] Benchmark performance when using SSD as the journal


[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Please report any suspicious attachments, links, or requests for sensitive information.
Only certain SSD's are good for CEPH Journals as can be seen @ https://www.sebastien-han.fr/blog/2014/10/10/ceph-how-to-test-if-your-ssd-is-suitable-as-a-journal-device/

The SSD your using isn't listed but doing a quick search online it appears to be a SSD designed for read workloads as a "upgrade" from a HD so probably is not designed for the high write requirements a journal demands.
Therefore when it's been hit by 3 OSD's of workloads your not going to get much more performance out of it than you would just using the disk as your seeing.

On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 12:21 PM <Dave.Chen at dell.com<mailto:Dave.Chen at dell.com>> wrote:
Hi all,

We want to compare the performance between HDD partition as the journal (inline from OSD disk) and SSD partition as the journal, here is what we have done, we have 3 nodes used as Ceph OSD,  each has 3 OSD on it. Firstly, we created the OSD with journal from OSD partition, and run “rados bench” utility to test the performance, and then migrate the journal from HDD to SSD (Intel S4500) and run “rados bench” again, the expected result is SSD partition should be much better than HDD, but the result shows us there is nearly no change,

The configuration of Ceph is as below,
pool size: 3
osd size: 3*3
pg (pgp) num: 300
osd nodes are separated across three different nodes
rbd image size: 10G (10240M)

The utility I used is,
rados bench -p rbd $duration write
rados bench -p rbd $duration seq
rados bench -p rbd $duration rand

Is there anything wrong from what I did?  Could anyone give me some suggestion?


Best Regards,
Dave Chen

_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users at lists.ceph.com<mailto:ceph-users at lists.ceph.com>
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users at lists.ceph.com<mailto:ceph-users at lists.ceph.com>
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ceph.com/pipermail/ceph-users-ceph.com/attachments/20181114/1a336fd5/attachment.html>


More information about the ceph-users mailing list