Hi
some more information about the xen drbd performance problem (two servers,
each server has two drbd devices (protocol c, ext4) and is primary for one of
them). Any test without memory restriction for dom0. The network connection
between the drbd servers limits the troughput to ~230 MB for each drbd device
(2 x 1000 Mbps cards, bond mode 0).
The local drive is a hardware raid10 with 12 300gb (3gbps 10k SAS) harddiscs.
The kernel is the latest debian/squeeze based kernel 2.6.32-5-amd64 (with
http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/kernel/?op=comp&compare[]=%2Fdists%2Fsid@15998&compare[]=%2Fdists%2Fsid@16001)
bonnie on the local drive with hypevisor
~ 400 MB/sec
bonnie on the connected drbd device with hypevisor
~ 170 MB/sec (bonnie on one drbd device/server)
~ 110 MB/sec (bonnie on both drbd devices/servers)
bonnie on the connected drbd device without hypevisor
~ 230 MB/sec (bonnie on one drbd device/server)
~ 200 MB/sec (bonnie on both drbd devices/servers)
bonnie on the disconnected drbd device with hypevisor
~ 300 MB/sec
bonnie on the disconnected drbd device without hypevisor
~ 360 MB/sec
What interests me is the throughput when writing to both servers. With the xen
hypevisor i get 110 MB/sec on each drbd device (220 MB/sec io throughput on
each server because drbd writes "locale" and "remote"). Without the
hypervisor i get 200 MB/sec on each drbd device (400 MB/sec io throughput on
each server, the maximum of what the io backend allows).
But even with only one drbd device the io is without the hypevisor much better
(230 MB/sec without and 170 MB/sec with hypervisor)
The strange thing is, a drbd resync gives me with or without hypervisor ~ 230
MB/sec. And when i start one server without hypervisor, bonnie gives me ~ 230
MB/sec on that server and on the remote server with the hypervisor (because
drbd also writes remote).
Any hints?
Thanks,
Felix
xm info
host : samla
release : 2.6.32-ucs9-xen-amd64
version : #1 SMP Thu Jul 22 04:32:22 UTC 2010
machine : x86_64
nr_cpus : 8
nr_nodes : 1
cores_per_socket : 4
threads_per_core : 1
cpu_mhz : 2133
hw_caps :
bfebfbff:28100800:00000000:00000340:009ce3bd:00000000:00000001:00000000
virt_caps : hvm
total_memory : 24564
free_memory : 22230
node_to_cpu : node0:0-7
node_to_memory : node0:22230
xen_major : 3
xen_minor : 4
xen_extra : .3
xen_caps : xen-3.0-x86_64 xen-3.0-x86_32p hvm-3.0-x86_32
hvm-3.0-x86_32p hvm-3.0-x86_64
xen_scheduler : credit
xen_pagesize : 4096
platform_params : virt_start=0xffff800000000000
xen_changeset : unavailable
cc_compiler : gcc version 4.3.2 (Debian 4.3.2-1.1.13.200909082302)
cc_compile_by : root
cc_compile_domain : [unknown]
cc_compile_date : Thu Jun 17 14:54:34 UTC 2010
xend_config_format : 4
Am Dienstag 20 Juli 2010 15:54:21 schrieb Felix Botner:
> Am Dienstag 20 Juli 2010 14:35:30 schrieb Pasi Kärkkäinen:
> > On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 10:46:34AM +0200, Felix Botner wrote:
> > > Hi everyone,
> > >
> > > i have two servers installed with a debian/lenny based os (64bit), a
> > > debian/sid based kernel 2.6.32-xen-amd64 and xen 3.4.3-4. Each server
> > > has two drbd devices (protocol c, formatted with ext4) and is primary
> > > for one of them. Every drbd pair has a dedicated network interface (a
> > > bond mode 0 interface with two 1000 Mbps cards).
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > > The io performance on the connected drbd devices is significantly worse
> > > if i start the kernel with the xen hypervisor (with "kernel
> > > /boot/xen-3.4.3.gz"). Without the hypervisor (but the same kernel) the
> > > systems are about 50% faster.
> >
> > Are you measuring from dom0 or from a guest?
>
> From dom0, there are no guests at the moment.
>
> > > Why is there such a difference?
> > > Can i optimize my xend (i already added dom0_mem=2048M dom0_max_vcpus=2
> > > dom0_vcpus_pin as boot parameter with no effect)?
> > > Are there any known issues using XEN and bonding/drbd?
> > >
> > > Feel free to ask for more information about the system or the setup.
> >
> > How much memory does your server have?
> > ie. how much ram do you have when you boot it baremetal without Xen.
>
> ~20GB without Xen. Now i removed the hypervisor param dom0_mem=2048M from
> menu.lst (in xend-config set (dom0-min-mem 196) and (enable-dom0-ballooning
> yes)), rebooted and as far as i know there should be no memory restriction
> for dom0. "xm list" shows me the complete memory for dom0:
>
> server1-> xm list
> Name ID Mem VCPUs State
> Time(s)
> Domain-0 0 18323 2 r-----
> 1785.0
>
> server2-> xm list
> Name ID Mem VCPUs State
> Time(s)
> Domain-0 0 22375 2 r-----
> 1754.2
>
> But bonnie++ gives me still bad results:
>
> server1,60000M,,,113444,30,55569,13,,,231555,23,622.6,0,16,25634,70,+++++,+
>++, +++++,+++,+++++,+++,+++++,+++,+++++,+++
> server2,60000M,,,114014,31,53864,13,,,243541,27,617.4,0,16,+++++,+++,+++++,
> +++,+++++,+++,+++++,+++,+++++,+++,+++++,+++
>
> So i don't think caching is the issue, or?
>
> bye
>
> Felix
>
> > Remember all the free memory of the host/dom0 will be used by linux
> > pagecache.. So if you limit dom0 to 2GB, it'll have less cache than the
> > baremetal case.
> >
> > -- Pasi
--
Felix Botner
Open Source Software Engineer
Univention GmbH
Linux for your business
Mary-Somerville-Str.1
28359 Bremen
Tel. : +49 421 22232-0
Fax : +49 421 22232-99
botner@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
http://www.univention.de
Geschäftsführer: Peter H. Ganten
HRB 20755 Amtsgericht Bremen
Steuer-Nr.: 71-597-02876
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
|
Home