Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register  
Client Area  |  Softaculous Cloud  |  Calendar  |  Quick Links  |  
   


You are here: Index > Virtualizor - Virtual Server Control Panel > General Support > Topic : Ip problem!

Page 1 of 3123>>>All


Threaded Mode | Print  

 Ip problem! (31 Replies, Read 8700 times)
moka
Posted on # June 12, 2015, 6:46 am
Group: Member
Post Group: Working Newbie
Posts: 60
Status:
Hi,
This is the test result on a node with 4X500 GB ssd in raid10 (soft) :

VPS (Virtio enabled):

[root@host ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/output.img bs=8k count=256k
262144+0 records in
262144+0 records out
2147483648 bytes (2.1 GB) copied, 14.4261 s, 149 MB/s


Main node:

[root@104 ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/output.img bs=8k count=256k
262144+0 records in
262144+0 records out
2147483648 bytes (2.1 GB) copied, 1.86184 s, 1.2 GB/s


Why is this happening?!
IP: --   

Ip problem!
ZXHost
Posted on # June 12, 2015, 9:34 am | Post: 1
Group: Member
Post Group: Newbie
Posts: 34
Status:
Can you give us the full output of virsh dumpxml VMID

,Ashley
IP: --   

Ip problem!
moka
Posted on # June 12, 2015, 1:56 pm | Post: 2
Group: Member
Post Group: Working Newbie
Posts: 60
Status:
Another test with virtio enabled while creating the vps:
Board Image

Virish:


<domain type='kvm' id='12'>
  <name>v1006</name>
  <uuid>8c99136c-09b0-4c17-a53c-9ef7f1c3d177</uuid>
  <memory unit='KiB'>1048576</memory>
  <currentMemory unit='KiB'>1048576</currentMemory>
  <vcpu placement='static'>2</vcpu>
  <cputune>
    <shares>1024</shares>
    <period>100000</period>
    <quota>50000</quota>
    <emulator_period>100000</emulator_period>
    <emulator_quota>50000</emulator_quota>
  </cputune>
  <os>
    <type arch='x86_64' machine='rhel6.6.0'>hvm</type>
    <boot dev='hd'/>
    <bootmenu enable='yes'/>
  </os>
  <features>
    <acpi/>
    <apic/>
    <pae/>
  </features>
  <cpu mode='host-passthrough'>
  </cpu>
  <clock offset='utc'>
    <timer name='pit' tickpolicy='delay'/>
    <timer name='rtc' tickpolicy='catchup'/>
    <timer name='hpet' present='no'/>
  </clock>
  <on_poweroff>destroy</on_poweroff>
  <on_reboot>restart</on_reboot>
  <on_crash>restart</on_crash>
  <devices>
    <emulator>/usr/libexec/qemu-kvm</emulator>
    <disk type='block' device='disk'>
      <driver name='qemu' type='raw' cache='none'/>
      <source dev='/dev/vg/vsv1006-vlx8npfwl6ilystc'/>
      <target dev='vda' bus='virtio'/>
      <alias name='virtio-disk0'/>
      <address type='pci' domain='0x0000' bus='0x00' slot='0x05' function='0x0'/                                                                                                                    >
    </disk>
    <controller type='usb' index='0'>
      <alias name='usb0'/>
      <address type='pci' domain='0x0000' bus='0x00' slot='0x01' function='0x2'/                                                                                                                    >
    </controller>
    <interface type='bridge'>
      <mac address='00:16:3e:10:94:40'/>
      <source bridge='viifbr0'/>
      <target dev='viifv1006'/>
      <filterref filter='clean-traffic'>
        <parameter name='IP' value='104.237.194.2'/>
      </filterref>
      <alias name='net0'/>
      <address type='pci' domain='0x0000' bus='0x00' slot='0x03' function='0x0'/                                                                                                                    >
    </interface>
    <serial type='pty'>
      <source path='/dev/pts/2'/>
      <target port='0'/>
      <alias name='serial0'/>
    </serial>
    <console type='pty' tty='/dev/pts/2'>
      <source path='/dev/pts/2'/>
      <target type='serial' port='0'/>
      <alias name='serial0'/>
    </console>
    <input type='tablet' bus='usb'>
      <alias name='input0'/>
    </input>
    <input type='mouse' bus='ps2'/>
    <graphics type='vnc' port='5906' autoport='no' listen='104.237.193.218' keym                                                                                                                    ap='en-us'>
      <listen type='address' address='104.237.193.218'/>
    </graphics>
    <sound model='ich6'>
      <codec type='micro'/>
      <alias name='sound0'/>
      <address type='pci' domain='0x0000' bus='0x00' slot='0x04' function='0x0'/                                                                                                                    >
    </sound>
    <video>
      <model type='cirrus' vram='9216' heads='1'/>
      <alias name='video0'/>
      <address type='pci' domain='0x0000' bus='0x00' slot='0x02' function='0x0'/                                                                                                                    >
    </video>
    <memballoon model='virtio'>
      <alias name='balloon0'/>
      <address type='pci' domain='0x0000' bus='0x00' slot='0x06' function='0x0'/                                                                                                                    >
    </memballoon>
  </devices>
</domain>

IP: --   

Ip problem!
ZXHost
Posted on # June 12, 2015, 2:01 pm | Post: 3
Group: Member
Post Group: Newbie
Posts: 34
Status:
Your last test of 420~ is what I would expect, being inside the VM it will be writing data straight to the array due to cache being set to none, where within your node OS it will be using the OS ram cache and then writing to disk later.

You can change this by changing the cache to write-back in virtualizor, however you then do risk data loss if your server was to loose power before all data is written from Ram to Disk.
IP: --   

Ip problem!
moka
Posted on # June 12, 2015, 2:33 pm | Post: 4
Group: Member
Post Group: Working Newbie
Posts: 60
Status:
Quote From : ZXHost June 12, 2015, 2:01 pm
Your last test of 420~ is what I would expect, being inside the VM it will be writing data straight to the array due to cache being set to none, where within your node OS it will be using the OS ram cache and then writing to disk later.

You can change this by changing the cache to write-back in virtualizor, however you then do risk data loss if your server was to loose power before all data is written from Ram to Disk.


But I expect more for SSD in raid10 , check this:
Board Image

Its a VPS on another node with Vmware esxi with 4X3TB HDD in raid 10 , its mroe than the half of my SSD in raid 10 !
IP: --   

Ip problem!
ZXHost
Posted on # June 12, 2015, 2:37 pm | Post: 5
Group: Member
Post Group: Newbie
Posts: 34
Status:
Hello,

SSD's are good at some things but not others your still getting double the throughput than your HD raid SSD's are best at High IOp's and low latency to anywhere on the disk, where a standard HD has latency to seak to the required section of the disk, what SSD's are they?

Also you will want to check if you have cache enabled within VMware, as that could be helping with the values you are seeing, KVM/Virtualizor by default has cache disabled.

,Ashley

Edited by ZXHost : June 12, 2015, 2:39 pm
IP: --   

Ip problem!
moka
Posted on # June 12, 2015, 2:43 pm | Post: 6
Group: Member
Post Group: Working Newbie
Posts: 60
Status:
They are new Samsung SSD 840 EVO 500GB .
IP: --   

Ip problem!
ZXHost
Posted on # June 12, 2015, 2:50 pm | Post: 7
Group: Member
Post Group: Newbie
Posts: 34
Status:
Reviews and specs of that drive get around 280Mbps write, so in Raid 10 you can never expect more than twice the speed of one drive. And with overhead what your getting sounds about right.
IP: --   

Ip problem!
moka
Posted on # June 12, 2015, 2:55 pm | Post: 8
Group: Member
Post Group: Working Newbie
Posts: 60
Status:
Quote From : ZXHost June 12, 2015, 2:50 pm
Reviews and specs of that drive get around 280Mbps write, so in Raid 10 you can never expect more than twice the speed of one drive. And with overhead what your getting sounds about right.


Where did you see that 280mbps?

Also how Also please check this: http://serverbear.com/benchmarks/io
How are they getting such a huge IO? Btw, I am using SoftRaid 10, as I believe with SSD, raid card just adds another point of failure and not much difference overall.

IP: --   

Ip problem!
ZXHost
Posted on # June 12, 2015, 3:17 pm | Post: 9
Group: Member
Post Group: Newbie
Posts: 34
Status:
Hello,

Any review online of the SSD model shows you performance of around that amount, which is real life performance.

Did you mean to link to a certain benchmark as the link you provided is just a general link.
IP: --   

Ip problem!
moka
Posted on # June 12, 2015, 3:20 pm | Post: 10
Group: Member
Post Group: Working Newbie
Posts: 60
Status:
Quote From : ZXHost June 12, 2015, 3:17 pm
Hello,

Any review online of the SSD model shows you performance of around that amount, which is real life performance.

Did you mean to link to a certain benchmark as the link you provided is just a general link.


I meant any of them, they are all above mine. Their prices shows that they are not using some special ssd models, I believe. Do you have any test from your own server by the way?
IP: --   

Ip problem!
ZXHost
Posted on # June 12, 2015, 3:25 pm | Post: 11
Group: Member
Post Group: Newbie
Posts: 34
Status:
All the top results are OpenVZ, this is a filed based virtualization instead of KVM which is a image based, so the I/O benchmark will be making use of the Write Back cache on the system.

The reason your getting high numbers on the OS is because Write Back will write the files to the RAM and then latter to disk, if you was to run the bechmark but instead ask it to write 20GB instead of 2GB you would have a much smaller value, more around the 400 your seeing in your VM.

As the ram cache will be exhausted so it will start to write the dirty pages (files in ram) to disk, the current I/O test you are completing is just being wrote straight to RAM.

However inside the VM as the cache is disabled it is being wrote directly to disk.
IP: --   

Ip problem!
ZXHost
Posted on # June 12, 2015, 3:42 pm | Post: 12
Group: Member
Post Group: Newbie
Posts: 34
Status:
An example on one of our SSD node's

dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/output.img bs=32k count=256k
262144+0 records in
262144+0 records out
8589934592 bytes (8.6 GB) copied, 5.45408 s, 1.6 GB/s


dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/output.img bs=128k count=256k
262144+0 records in
262144+0 records out
34359738368 bytes (34 GB) copied, 43.8186 s, 784 MB/s
IP: --   

Ip problem!
moka
Posted on # June 12, 2015, 3:46 pm | Post: 13
Group: Member
Post Group: Working Newbie
Posts: 60
Status:
Quote From : ZXHost June 12, 2015, 3:42 pm
An example on one of our SSD node's

dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/output.img bs=32k count=256k
262144+0 records in
262144+0 records out
8589934592 bytes (8.6 GB) copied, 5.45408 s, 1.6 GB/s


dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/output.img bs=128k count=256k
262144+0 records in
262144+0 records out
34359738368 bytes (34 GB) copied, 43.8186 s, 784 MB/s


Check mine:
Board Image

why so much difference? May I know the server spec? Is it virt+kvm too? Whats the storage type? File based or LVM?
IP: --   

Ip problem!
ZXHost
Posted on # June 12, 2015, 3:49 pm | Post: 14
Group: Member
Post Group: Newbie
Posts: 34
Status:
Hello,

Both of them results was in the node itself, showing you the difference between cache and non cache.

The first result was all going straight into RAM, second was going straight to disk hence the 1/2 performance, this is what your seeing in KVM by default, if you run the two commands on your node's OS your see the difference when using cache or not.

It is H/W Raid 10 4 x 1TB Samsung Pro 850 SSD
IP: --   

« Previous    Next »

Threaded Mode | Print  

Page 1 of 3123>>>All


Jump To :


Users viewing this topic
1 guests, 0 users.


All times are GMT. The time now is April 30, 2025, 11:08 pm.

  Powered By AEF 1.0.8 © 2007-2008 Electron Inc.Queries: 10  |  Page Created In:0.031