From: "Vitaly V. Bursov" <vitalyb@telenet.dn.ua>
To: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Slow file transfer speeds with CFQ IO scheduler in some cases
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 20:33:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <491C72F8.9030605@telenet.dn.ua> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <x49skpvg0hw.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com>
Jeff Moyer wrote:
>> It's 2.6.18-openvz-rhel5 kernel gives me 9MB/s, and with 2.6.27 I get ~40-50MB/s
>> instead of 80-90 MB/s as there should be no bottlenecks except the network.
>
> Reading back through your original problem report, I'm not seeing what
> your numbers were with deadline; you simply mentioned that it "fixed"
> the problem. Are you sure you'll get 80-90MB/s for this? The local
> disks in my configuration, when performing a dd on the server system,
> can produce numbers around 85 MB/s, yet the NFS performance is around 65
> MB/s (and this is a gigabit network).
I have pair of 1TB HDDs and each of them is able to deliver around
100MB/s for sequental reads and PCI-E Ethernet adapter not sharing
a bus with SATA controller.
2.6.18-openvz-rhel5, loopback mounted nfs with deadline gives
1000+0 records in
1000+0 records out
1048576000 bytes (1.0 GB) copied, 7.12014 s, 147 MB/s
and same system via network:
1000+0 records in
1000+0 records out
1048576000 bytes (1.0 GB) copied, 14.3197 s, 73.2 MB/s
and network+cfq:
dd if=samefile of=/dev/null bs=1M count=1000
1000+0 records in
1000+0 records out
1048576000 bytes (1.0 GB) copied, 59.3116 s, 17.7 MB/s
and network+file cached on server side:
1000+0 records in
1000+0 records out
1048576000 bytes (1.0 GB) copied, 12.4204 s, 84.4 MB/s
Well, 73 is still not 80, but way much better than 17 (or,
even worse - 9)
I have 8 NFS threads by default here.
I got 17 MB here because of HZ=1000, also 2.6.27 performed
better in every heavy-nfs-transfer test so far
Changed network parateters:
net.core.wmem_default = 1048576
net.core.wmem_max = 1048576
net.core.rmem_default = 1048576
net.core.rmem_max = 1048576
net.ipv4.tcp_mem = 1048576 1048576 4194304
net.ipv4.tcp_rmem = 1048576 1048576 4194304
net.ipv4.tcp_rmem = 1048576 1048576 4194304
net.ipv4.tcp_wmem = 1048576 1048576 4194304
net.ipv4.tcp_wmem = 1048576 1048576 4194304
MTU: 6000
Sorry, I didn't mention these in original post.
>>> Single dd performing a cold cache read of a 1GB file from an
>>> nfs server. read_ahead_kb is 128 (the default) for all tests.
>>> cfq-cc denotes that the cfq scheduler was patched with the close
>>> cooperator patch. All numbers are in MB/s.
>>>
>>> nfsd threads| 1 | 2 | 4 | 8
>>> ----------------------------------------
>>> deadline | 65.3 | 52.2 | 46.7 | 46.1
>>> cfq | 64.1 | 57.8 | 53.3 | 46.9
>>> cfq-cc | 65.7 | 55.8 | 52.1 | 40.3
>>>
>>> So, in my configuration, cfq and deadline both degrade in performance as
>>> the number of nfsd threads is increased. The close cooperator patch
>>> seems to hurt a bit more at 8 threads, instead of helping; I'm not sure
>>> why that is.
>> Interesting, I'll try to change nfsd threads number and see how it performs
>> on my setup. Setting it to 1 seems like a good idea for cfq and a non-high-end
>> hardware.
>
> I think you're looking at this backwards. I'm no nfsd tuning expert,
> but I'm pretty sure that you would tune the numbe,r of threads based on
> the number of active clients and the amount of memory on the server
> (since each thread has to reserve memory for incoming requests).
I understand this. It's just one of the parameters I completely missed
out of my sight :)
>> I'll look into it this evening.
>
> The real reason I tried varying the number of nfsd threads was to show,
> at least for CFQ, that spreading a sequential I/O load across multiple
> threads would result in suboptimal performance. What I found, instead,
> was that it hurt performance for cfq *and* deadline (and that the close
> cooperator patches did not help in this regard). This tells me that
> there is something else which is affecting the performance. What that
> something is I don't know, I think we'd have to take a closer look at
> what's going on on the server to figure it out.
>
I've tested it also...
loopback:
nfsd threads | 1 | 2 | 4 | 8 | 16
----------------------------------------
deadline-vz | 97| 92| 128| 145| 148
deadline | 145| 160| 173| 170| 150
cfq-cc | 137| 150| 167| 157| 133
cfq | 26| 28| 34| 38| 38
network:
nfsd threads | 1 | 2 | 4| 8| 16
----------------------------------------
deadline-vz | 68| 69| 75| 73| 72
deadline | 91| 89| 87| 88| 84
cfq-cc | 91| 89| 88| 82| 74
cfq | 25| 28| 32| 36| 34
deadline-vz - deadline with 2.6.18-openvz-rhel5 kernel
deadline, cfq, cfq-cc - linux-2.6.27.5
Yep, it's not that simple as I thought...
--
Regards,
Vitaly
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-11-13 18:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 77+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-11-09 18:04 Slow file transfer speeds with CFQ IO scheduler in some cases Vitaly V. Bursov
2008-11-09 18:30 ` Alexey Dobriyan
2008-11-09 18:32 ` Vitaly V. Bursov
2008-11-10 10:44 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-10 13:51 ` Jeff Moyer
2008-11-10 13:56 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-10 17:16 ` Vitaly V. Bursov
2008-11-10 17:35 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-10 18:27 ` Vitaly V. Bursov
2008-11-10 18:29 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-10 18:39 ` Jeff Moyer
2008-11-10 18:42 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-10 21:51 ` Jeff Moyer
2008-11-11 9:34 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-11 9:35 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-11 11:52 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-11 16:48 ` Jeff Moyer
2008-11-11 18:08 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-11 16:53 ` Vitaly V. Bursov
2008-11-11 18:06 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-11 19:36 ` Jeff Moyer
2008-11-11 21:41 ` Jeff Layton
2008-11-11 21:59 ` Jeff Layton
2008-11-12 12:20 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-12 12:45 ` Jeff Layton
2008-11-12 12:54 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-11-11 19:42 ` Vitaly V. Bursov
2008-11-12 18:32 ` Jeff Moyer
2008-11-12 19:02 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-13 8:51 ` Wu Fengguang
2008-11-13 8:54 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-14 1:36 ` Wu Fengguang
2008-11-25 11:02 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2008-11-25 11:25 ` Wu Fengguang
2008-11-25 15:21 ` Jeff Moyer
2008-11-25 16:17 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2008-11-13 18:46 ` Vitaly V. Bursov
2008-11-25 10:59 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2008-11-25 11:30 ` Wu Fengguang
2008-11-25 11:41 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2008-11-25 11:49 ` Wu Fengguang
2008-11-25 12:03 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2008-11-25 12:09 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2008-11-25 12:15 ` Wu Fengguang
2008-11-27 17:46 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
[not found] ` <492EDCFB.7080302-d+Crzxg7Rs0@public.gmane.org>
2008-11-28 0:48 ` Wu Fengguang
2008-11-28 0:48 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-02-12 18:35 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2009-02-13 1:57 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-02-13 20:08 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2009-02-13 20:08 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
[not found] ` <4995D339.5050502-d+Crzxg7Rs0@public.gmane.org>
2009-02-16 2:34 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-02-16 2:34 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-02-17 19:03 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2009-02-17 19:03 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2009-02-18 18:14 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2009-02-19 1:35 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-02-17 19:01 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2009-02-17 19:01 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2009-02-19 2:05 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-03-19 17:44 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2009-03-20 8:53 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2009-03-23 1:42 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-04-21 18:18 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2009-04-24 8:43 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-05-12 18:13 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
[not found] ` <49946BE6.1040005-d+Crzxg7Rs0@public.gmane.org>
2009-02-17 19:01 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2009-02-17 19:01 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
[not found] ` <499B0979.8050006-d+Crzxg7Rs0@public.gmane.org>
2009-02-19 1:38 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-02-19 1:38 ` Wu Fengguang
2008-11-24 15:33 ` Jeff Moyer
2008-11-24 18:13 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-24 18:50 ` Jeff Moyer
2008-11-24 18:51 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-13 6:54 ` Vitaly V. Bursov
2008-11-13 14:32 ` Jeff Moyer
2008-11-13 18:33 ` Vitaly V. Bursov [this message]
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=491C72F8.9030605@telenet.dn.ua \
--to=vitalyb@telenet.dn.ua \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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.