MD BMG/roadmap: Difference between revisions

From OpenSFS Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
[[File:Example.jpg]]* Collect benchmark tools candidates from OpenSFS  
* Collect benchmark tools candidates from OpenSFS  
* Evaluate all the tools and the workloads that can benchmarked  
* Evaluate all the tools and the workloads that can benchmarked  
* Recommend a small set of MD benchmark tools to cover the majority of MD workloads  
* Recommend a small set of MD benchmark tools to cover the majority of MD workloads  

Revision as of 07:50, 28 February 2014

  • Collect benchmark tools candidates from OpenSFS
  • Evaluate all the tools and the workloads that can benchmarked
  • Recommend a small set of MD benchmark tools to cover the majority of MD workloads
  • Collect stats from users of MD benchmarks
  • Build scripts to allow ease of use of the recommended tools
  • Write documentation for troubleshooting MD performance problems using the toolset
  • Create a special website for MD tools


We ran 3 of the benchmarks proposed with similar configurations so we can compare the benchmarks. We ran the tests on 2 Lustre FS :

  • First FS on 60 disk drives configured in 6 OST's with RAID-6 (8+2) and the MDT on a RAID-5 (4+1) flash devices
  • Second on 20 SSD drives configured in 2 OST's with RAID-6 (8+2) and the MDT on a RAID-5 (4+1) flash devices

The results and some comments are in the pdf file format as follows:

  1. mdtest summary
  2. Postmark summary
  3. Netmist MPI summary


Please note that I used iostat for monitoring the utilization of the devices and that the metadata set was 3x larger than the cache size of the MDS.
Return to Metadata Performance Evaluation page.