Re: [Moosefs-users] MooseFS performance benchmarking.

[Flow J. <fl...@gm...>]

We are experiencing the same issue when dealing with a lot of small files.

One observation is, when scp a large file through Gigabyte link onto our 
NFS server (Served by a VERY old Sun Raid5 Disk Array), there seems to 
have a large write cache to allow the speed reported at the first 
several seconds greater than the writing limit of hard drives. But when 
copying the same file onto MFS (Served by SAS 300G 10k disk on Dell PE 
1950), the speed never reaches the hard drive limit. And our NFS server 
do perform better than MFS when copying large amount of source code files.

I'm not sure if this issue is only related to our SW/HW configuration. 
But seems the write caches works better with NFS than MFS. Does any one 
know how does write cache of MFS work?

Thanks
Flow


On 10/17/2011 10:46 PM, leo...@ar... wrote:
> Greetings!
> Resently I've started performance benchmarking for MooseFS,
> _____________ __ _ _
> Chunkservers:
> CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU           X3430  @ 2.40GHz
> RAM: 12G
> HDD: storage used for mfs chunks is raid0 of two WD 7200rpm caviar
> black disks.
> OS: OpenSuSE 11.3
> Chunk servers number: 5
>
> -------------------------------
> Master:
>
> CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU           X3430  @ 2.40GHz
> OS: OpenSuSE 11.3
> RAM: 12G
>
> --------------------------------
> Client:
> One of chunkservers.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> LAN:
> 1Gbit/s LAN.
>
> ____________ _ _ __
> Problem;
> I've experimented alot with bonnie, fio, iozone and others in testing
> other storages... We have people working with the source code here, so
> we need good random I/O for small files with moderate blocksize from 8k
> to 128k... Comparative testing of other storage solutions involving ZFS,
> different hardware raids etc showed that simple taring and untaring
> Linux kernel sources shows how good can the storage be for that kind of
> work... and it always correlates with more advanced fio and iozone
> tests.
>
> So, simple untaring Linux kernel sources takes about 7 seconds on
> chunkservers storage bypassing moosefs... but when I untar it to mounted
> moosefs it takes more than 230 seconds.
> Goal is set to 1. CPU load is OK on all the servers, RAM is sufficient.
> Network is not overloaded and I can untar this file in about7 secs to
> our nfs-mounted NAS....
> I even turned on files caching on the client.
> And this is all is very strange... maybe fuse is the bottleneck?...
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a
> definitive record of customers, application performance, security
> threats, fraudulent activity and more. Splunk takes this data and makes
> sense of it. Business sense. IT sense. Common sense.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-oct
> _______________________________________________
> moosefs-users mailing list
> moo...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/moosefs-users