[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-users] Xen IO performance issues


  • To: xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, marki <list+xenusers@xxxxxxx>
  • From: Hans van Kranenburg <hans@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2018 21:43:38 +0200
  • Autocrypt: addr=hans@xxxxxxxxxxx; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= xsFNBFo2pooBEADwTBe/lrCa78zuhVkmpvuN+pXPWHkYs0LuAgJrOsOKhxLkYXn6Pn7e3xm+ ySfxwtFmqLUMPWujQYF0r5C6DteypL7XvkPP+FPVlQnDIifyEoKq8JZRPsAFt1S87QThYPC3 mjfluLUKVBP21H3ZFUGjcf+hnJSN9d9MuSQmAvtJiLbRTo5DTZZvO/SuQlmafaEQteaOswme DKRcIYj7+FokaW9n90P8agvPZJn50MCKy1D2QZwvw0g2ZMR8yUdtsX6fHTe7Ym+tHIYM3Tsg 2KKgt17NTxIqyttcAIaVRs4+dnQ23J98iFmVHyT+X2Jou+KpHuULES8562QltmkchA7YxZpT mLMZ6TPit+sIocvxFE5dGiT1FMpjM5mOVCNOP+KOup/N7jobCG15haKWtu9k0kPz+trT3NOn gZXecYzBmasSJro60O4bwBayG9ILHNn+v/ZLg/jv33X2MV7oYXf+ustwjXnYUqVmjZkdI/pt 30lcNUxCANvTF861OgvZUR4WoMNK4krXtodBoEImjmT385LATGFt9HnXd1rQ4QzqyMPBk84j roX5NpOzNZrNJiUxj+aUQZcINtbpmvskGpJX0RsfhOh2fxfQ39ZP/0a2C59gBQuVCH6C5qsY rc1qTIpGdPYT+J1S2rY88AvPpr2JHZbiVqeB3jIlwVSmkYeB/QARAQABzR5Kb2hhbm5lcyBN YXJpam4gdmFuIEtyYW5lbmJ1cmfCwZEEEwEKADsCGwMFCwkIBwMFFQoJCAsFFgIDAQACHgEC F4AWIQTib9aPwejUthlFRk7ngVcyGAwqVQUCWjawgAIZAQAKCRDngVcyGAwqVZZ3D/98GzxN iFK38eh60e9TARh4HCgEWHD14/YK6KGpzF5UXM7CkKnb0NDjM3TzeeaIYzsOJITSW6rMOm5L NcJTUmw0x4vt43yc+DFAaBNiywXWgFc6g9RpYg5X33y+jhbjDREsGMDAk89isKWo8I8+rZwl S9FSSopWkrj0wV64TRwAlTCrYaTlS56mHa9T5RJkmIY+suxRr3Xl2gcKvng2Kh2WCDHjItUF /t3DfjMCIEL18QlXieyY2w1K0h4iT93YNkEdSpElsD5lFdt7XUfy3Q89eQHtd5n21cXG9lMc fcSbmHdn0ugYF0Hu2xVKCcYwWEgLjLRJ+G4aLQW122PKVVpn15/n7KMX9hQNMH4T8krEqOpd Vdb982gx5GSa+2j44+kOFTCnREN0w15JZI8Osi48xLdPqcrMVtvq9ga8tIPebAs8IM8Mf4JY okBS5sbCGEWZSSsDSdYm/Fp39HA3AEl2nI+wnJZCdgLx5NEnCd5Ni9d6rzC8Te7SvVvA/qlo sVDZAo6MJBYgoO9lPKHYD0FWomAeOlFVjdob0G2n1xBRjroVK0JQI3jpPQoZpc1TLauUQ+kT BQwWwFlpbfBbf0+CACWiQL0YgNNiZn885h4vU0EQI/FizjWUHxVLhXt1K4+x7nkhCZYzaIFL jLqw4y8f6SF9DxRMTM8dcaIQyThkms7BTQRaOtArARAA50ylThKbq0ACHyomxjQ6nFNxa9IC p6byU9LhhKOax0GB6l4WebMsQLhVGRQ8H7DT84E7QLRYsidEbneB1ciToZkL5YFFaVxY0Hj1 wKxCFcVoCRNtOfoPnHQ5m/eDLaO4o0KKL/kaxZwTn2jnl6BQDGX1Aak0u4KiUlFtoWn/E/NI v5QbTGSwIYuzWqqYBIzFtDbiQRvGw0NuKxAGMhwXy8VP05mmNwRdyh/CC4rWQPBTvTeMwr3n l8/G+16/cn4RNGhDiGTTXcX03qzZ5jZ5N7GLY5JtE6pTpLG+EXn5pAnQ7MvuO19cCbp6Dj8f XRmI0SVXWKSo0A2C8xH6KLCRfUMzD7nvDRU+bAHQmbi5cZBODBZ5yp5CfIL1KUCSoiGOMpMi n3FrarIlcxhNtoE+ya23A+JVtOwtM53ESra9cJL4WPkyk/E3OvNDmh8U6iZXn4ZaKQTHaxN9 yvmAUhZQiQi/sABwxCcQQ2ydRb86Vjcbx+FUr5OoEyQS46gc3KN5yax9D3H9wrptOzkNNMUh Fj0oK0fX/MYDWOFeuNBTYk1uFRJDmHAOp01rrMHRogQAkMBuJDMrMHfolivZw8RKfdPzgiI5 00okLTzHC0wgSSAOyHKGZjYjbEwmxsl3sLJck9IPOKvqQi1DkvpOPFSUeX3LPBIav5UUlXt0 wjbzInUAEQEAAcLBdgQYAQoAIBYhBOJv1o/B6NS2GUVGTueBVzIYDCpVBQJaOtArAhsMAAoJ EOeBVzIYDCpV4kgP+wUh3BDRhuKaZyianKroStgr+LM8FIUwQs3Fc8qKrcDaa35vdT9cocDZ jkaGHprpmlN0OuT2PB+Djt7am2noV6Kv1C8EnCPpyDBCwa7DntGdGcGMjH9w6aR4/ruNRUGS 1aSMw8sRQgpTVWEyzHlnIH92D+k+IhdNG+eJ6o1fc7MeC0gUwMt27Im+TxVxc0JRfniNk8PU Ag4kvJq7z7NLBUcJsIh3hM0WHQH9AYe/mZhQq5oyZTsz4jo/dWFRSlpY7zrDS2TZNYt4cCfZ j1bIdpbfSpRi9M3W/yBF2WOkwYgbkqGnTUvr+3r0LMCH2H7nzENrYxNY2kFmDX9bBvOWsWpc MdOEo99/Iayz5/q2d1rVjYVFRm5U9hG+C7BYvtUOnUvSEBeE4tnJBMakbJPYxWe61yANDQub PsINB10ingzsm553yqEjLTuWOjzdHLpE4lzD416ExCoZy7RLEHNhM1YQSI2RNs8umlDfZM9L ek1+1kgBvT3RH0/CpPJgveWV5xDOKuhD8j5l7FME+t2RWP+gyLid6dE0C7J03ir90PlTEkME HEzyJMPtOhO05Phy+d51WPTo1VSKxhL4bsWddHLfQoXW8RQ388Q69JG4m+JhNH/XvWe3aQFp YP+GZuzOhkMez0lHCaVOOLBSKHkAHh9i0/pH+/3hfEa4NsoHCpyy
  • Delivery-date: Wed, 19 Sep 2018 19:44:09 +0000
  • List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xenproject.org>
  • Openpgp: preference=signencrypt

Hi,

On 09/19/2018 09:19 PM, marki wrote:
> On 2018-09-19 20:35, Sarah Newman wrote:
>> On 09/14/2018 04:04 AM, marki wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> We're having trouble with a dd "benchmark". Even though that probably
>>> doesn't mean much since multiple concurrent jobs using a benckmark
>>> like FIO for
>>> example work ok, I'd like to understand where the bottleneck is / why
>>> this behaves differently.
>>>
>>> In ESXi it looks like the following and speed is high: (iostat output
>>> below)
>>>
>>> (kernel 4.4)
>>> Device:         rrqm/s   wrqm/s     r/s     w/s    rMB/s    wMB/s
>>> avgrq-sz avgqu-sz   await r_await w_await  svctm  %util
>>> dm-5              0.00     0.00    0.00  512.00     0.00   512.00 
>>> 2048.00   142.66  272.65    0.00  272.65   1.95 100.00
>>> sdb               0.00     0.00    0.00  512.00     0.00   512.00 
>>> 2048.00   141.71  270.89    0.00  270.89   1.95 100.00
>>>
>>> # dd if=/dev/zero of=/u01/dd-test-file bs=32k count=250000
>>> 8192000000 bytes (8.2 GB, 7.6 GiB) copied, 9.70912 s, 844 MB/s
>>>
>>> Now in a Xen DomU running kernel 4.4 it looks like the following and
>>> speed is low / not what we're used to:
>>>
>>> Device:         rrqm/s   wrqm/s     r/s     w/s    rMB/s    wMB/s
>>> avgrq-sz avgqu-sz   await r_await w_await  svctm  %util
>>> dm-0              0.00     0.00    0.00  100.00     0.00    99.00 
>>> 2027.52     1.45   14.56    0.00   14.56  10.00 100.00
>>> xvdb              0.00     0.00    0.00 2388.00     0.00    99.44   
>>> 85.28    11.74    4.92    0.00    4.92   0.42  99.20
>>>
>>> # dd if=/dev/zero of=/u01/dd-test-file bs=32k count=250000
>>> 1376059392 bytes (1.4 GB, 1.3 GiB) copied, 7.09965 s, 194 MB/s

Interesting.

* Which Xen version are you using?
* Which Linux kernel version is being used in the dom0?
* Is this a PV, HVM or PVH guest?
* ...more details you can share?

>>> Note the low queue depth on the LVM device and additionally the low
>>> request size on the virtual disk.
>>>
>>> (As in the ESXi VM there's an LVM layer inside the DomU but it
>>> doesn't matter whether it's there or not.)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Inside Dom0 it looks like this:
>>>
>>> This is the VHD:
>>> Device:         rrqm/s   wrqm/s     r/s     w/s    rMB/s    wMB/s
>>> avgrq-sz avgqu-sz   await r_await w_await  svctm  %util
>>> dm-13             0.00     0.00    0.00 2638.00     0.00   105.72   
>>> 82.08    11.67    4.42    0.00    4.42   0.36  94.00
>>>
>>> This is the SAN:
>>> Device:         rrqm/s   wrqm/s     r/s     w/s    rMB/s    wMB/s
>>> avgrq-sz avgqu-sz   await r_await w_await  svctm  %util
>>> dm-0              0.00  2423.00    0.00  216.00     0.00   105.71 
>>> 1002.26     0.95    4.39    0.00    4.39   4.35  94.00
>>>
>>> And these are the individual paths on the SAN (multipathing):
>>>
>>> Device:         rrqm/s   wrqm/s     r/s     w/s    rMB/s    wMB/s
>>> avgrq-sz avgqu-sz   await r_await w_await  svctm  %util
>>> sdg               0.00     0.00    0.00  108.00     0.00    53.09 
>>> 1006.67     0.50    4.63    0.00    4.63   4.59  49.60
>>> sdl               0.00     0.00    0.00  108.00     0.00    52.62  
>>> 997.85     0.44    4.04    0.00    4.04   4.04  43.60
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The above applies to HV + HVPVM modes using kernel 4.4 in the DomU.

Do you mean PV and PVHVM, instead?

>>> The following applies to a HV or PV DomU running kernel 3.12:
>>>
>>> Device:         rrqm/s   wrqm/s     r/s     w/s    rMB/s    wMB/s
>>> avgrq-sz avgqu-sz   await r_await w_await  svctm  %util
>>> dm-1              0.00     0.00   41.00 7013.00     0.73   301.16   
>>> 87.65   142.78   20.44    5.17   20.53   0.14 100.00
>>> xvdb              0.00     0.00   41.00 7023.00     0.73   301.59   
>>> 87.65   141.80   20.27    5.17   20.36   0.14 100.00
>>>
>>> (Which is better but still not great.)
>>>
>>> Any explanations on this one?

What happens when you use a recent linux kernel in the guest, like 4.18?

Do things like using blk-mq make a difference here (just guessing around)?

>> If you figure it out let us know, it's been on my todo list to work on
>> for a bit now.
>>
>> --Sarah
> 
> Hey,
> 
> Well, it's the stupid ring buffer with 11 slots with 4 kB each between
> domU and dom0. This gives a maximum request size of 88 sectors (0,5 kB
> each) = 44 kB.
> 
> What's clear is that for modern storage like SSD arrays or NVMe disks,
> this simply won't cut it and Xen is a no-go...
> 
> I'd love if someone could tell me something different and/or how to
> optimize.
> 
> What still remains to be answered is the additional issue with low queue
> size (avgqu-sz).
> 
> From your response I guess this may need to go to the Dev list instead
> of here (since noone seems to have a clue about obvious
> questions/benchmarks).
> I wonder what kind of workloads people run on Xen. Can't be much =D

These kind of remarks do not really help much if your goal would be to
motivate other people to think about these things together with you, get
better understanding and maybe find out things that can help all of us.

Thanks,
Hans

P.S. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warnock%27s_dilemma

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-users

 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.