From: Sasha Kotchubievsky <sashakot at dev.mellanox.co.il>
To: spdk@lists.01.org
Subject: [SPDK] Re: SPDK socket abstraction layer
Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2019 21:56:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <009501d59413$114fce70$33ef6b50$@dev.mellanox.co.il> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 36cd5c96-700c-4fe0-999e-f04ae52891bb@email.android.com
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1847 bytes --]
Hi,
Our testing environment is:
SW:
CentOS Linux release 8.0.1905 (Core)
Kernel: 4.18.0-80.el8.x86_64
MLNX_OFED_LINUX-4.7-1.0.0.1
HW:
Mellanox Technologies MT27800 Family [ConnectX-5]
CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 6136 CPU @ 3.00GHz
We used null device in target. In both sides (Target, Initiator) we ran the
same SPDK version.
Best regards
Sasha
-----Original Message-----
From: Walker, Benjamin <benjamin.walker(a)intel.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 5, 2019 8:08 PM
To: Storage Performance Development Kit <spdk(a)lists.01.org>
Subject: [SPDK] Re: SPDK socket abstraction layer
Can you outline your system set up so I can reproduce this? On my system
currently the network stack is electing to do a deferred copy so the
performance is not good. I'd love to reproduce your exact set up.
I'm not surprised there are bugs at higher queue depth. The patch is
definitely still a work in progress.
On Nov 4, 2019 9:26 PM, allenz(a)mellanox.com wrote:
Hi,
With suggestion of Sasha, we synced the codes to patch
(https://review.gerrithub.io/c/spdk/spdk/+/471752). We run tests on two
X86-64 servers connected with Mellanox CX-5 100G.
For Perf with 16 QD/4K IO, we found 14% improvement with the zero-copy patch
when 1 or 2 cores were used, and 6% improvement when more cores (e.g., 8)
were used.
Unfortunately, when we tried to use queue depth more than 16, and bigger IO
than 4K, Perf hung or got CQ error. But without the zero-copy patch, 64QD or
64K IO was ok.
Best regards,
Allen
_______________________________________________
SPDK mailing list -- spdk(a)lists.01.org
To unsubscribe send an email to spdk-leave(a)lists.01.org
_______________________________________________
SPDK mailing list -- spdk(a)lists.01.org
To unsubscribe send an email to spdk-leave(a)lists.01.org
next reply other threads:[~2019-11-05 19:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-05 19:56 Sasha Kotchubievsky [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-06-01 16:55 [SPDK] Re: SPDK socket abstraction layer Zawadzki, Tomasz
2019-11-07 18:45 Walker, Benjamin
2019-11-07 16:26 Or Gerlitz
2019-11-06 10:19 Or Gerlitz
2019-11-05 18:08 Walker, Benjamin
2019-11-05 15:06 Or Gerlitz
2019-11-05 5:29 allenz
2019-11-03 16:56 Walker, Benjamin
2019-11-03 15:59 Or Gerlitz
2019-10-31 21:11 Andrey Kuzmin
2019-10-31 18:54 Walker, Benjamin
2019-10-31 14:21 Sasha Kotchubievsky
2019-10-30 23:20 Walker, Benjamin
2019-10-30 21:47 Sasha Kotchubievsky
2019-10-30 20:28 Walker, Benjamin
2019-10-30 19:55 Sasha Kotchubievsky
2019-10-30 18:46 Walker, Benjamin
2019-10-30 17:54 Harris, James R
2019-10-30 17:50 Sasha Kotchubievsky
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='009501d59413$114fce70$33ef6b50$@dev.mellanox.co.il' \
--to=spdk@lists.01.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.