From: "Mkrtchyan, Tigran" <tigran.mkrtchyan@desy.de>
To: linux-nfs <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: NFS client low performance in concurrent environment.
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2025 15:01:14 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1976198229.23396586.1743685274389.JavaMail.zimbra@desy.de> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3865 bytes --]
Dear NFS fellows,
As part of research, we have adopted a well-known in the HPC community, IOR[1],
to support libnfs[2]. After running a bunch of tests, our observation is that the
multiple clients in userspace have a higher throughput than the in-kernel
client (or server).
In the test below, nfs server runs on RHEL9 with kernel 5.14.0-503.23.1.el9_5.x86_64
exporting /mnt. The results are in operations per second, thus, higher numbers are better.
The client is an 80-core single host, running RHEL9 with kernel 5.14.0-427.26.1.el9_4.x86_64.
We used NFSv3 in the test to eliminate NFSv4's open/close overhead on zero-byte files.
TEST 1: libnfs
```
$ mpirun -n 128 --map-by :OVERSUBSCRIBE ./mdtest -a LIBNFS --libnfs.url='nfs://lab008/mnt/?uid=0&gid=0&version=3' -w 0 -I 128 -i 10 -z 0 -b 0 -F -d /test
-- started at 04/03/2025 14:39:30 --
mdtest-4.1.0+dev was launched with 128 total task(s) on 1 node(s)
Command line used: ./mdtest '-a' 'LIBNFS' '--libnfs.url=nfs://lab008/mnt/version=3' '-w' '0' '-I' '128' '-i' '10' '-z' '0' '-b' '0' '-F' '-d' '/test'
Nodemap: 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
Path : /test
FS : 38.2 GiB Used FS: 41.3% Inodes: 2.4 Mi Used Inodes: 5.8%
128 tasks, 16384 files
SUMMARY rate (in ops/sec): (of 10 iterations)
Operation Max Min Mean Std Dev
--------- --- --- ---- -------
File creation 7147.432 6789.531 6996.044 132.149
File stat 97175.603 57844.142 91063.340 12000.718
File read 97004.685 48234.620 89099.077 14715.699
File removal 25172.919 23405.880 24424.384 577.264
Tree creation 2375.031 555.537 1982.139 561.013
Tree removal 99.443 95.475 97.632 1.266
-- finished at 04/03/2025 14:40:05 --
```
TEST 2: in-kernel client
```
$ mpirun -n 128 --map-by :OVERSUBSCRIBE ./mdtest -w 0 -I 128 -i 10 -z 0 -b 0 -F -d /mnt/test
-- started at 04/03/2025 14:36:09 --
mdtest-4.1.0+dev was launched with 128 total task(s) on 1 node(s)
Nodemap: 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
Path : /mnt/test
FS : 38.2 GiB Used FS: 41.3% Inodes: 2.4 Mi Used Inodes: 5.8%
128 tasks, 16384 files
SUMMARY rate (in ops/sec): (of 10 iterations)
Operation Max Min Mean Std Dev
--------- --- --- ---- -------
File creation 2301.914 2046.406 2203.859 88.793
File stat 101396.240 77386.014 91270.677 6229.657
File read 43631.081 36858.229 40800.066 2534.255
File removal 3102.328 2647.649 2840.170 153.959
Tree creation 2142.137 253.739 1710.416 620.293
Tree removal 42.922 25.670 36.604 4.820
-- finished at 04/03/2025 14:38:28 --
```
Obviously, the kernel client shares the TCP connection. So, either (a) this is an expected behavior;
(b) client thread starvation; and (c) server thread starvation. The last option is unlikely, as we
first observed the behavior with the dCache NFS server implementation before falling back to
the linux kernel nfsd.
Best regards,
Tigran.
[1]: https://github.com/hpc/ior
[2]: https://github.com/sahlberg/libnfs
-----------------------------
DESY-IT, Scientific Computing
[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 2826 bytes --]
next reply other threads:[~2025-04-03 13:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-03 13:01 Mkrtchyan, Tigran [this message]
2025-04-04 3:14 ` NFS client low performance in concurrent environment NeilBrown
2025-04-05 17:10 ` Mkrtchyan, Tigran
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=1976198229.23396586.1743685274389.JavaMail.zimbra@desy.de \
--to=tigran.mkrtchyan@desy.de \
--cc=linux-nfs@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox