[gpfsug-discuss] Tuning AFM for high throughput/high IO over _really_ long distances (Jan-Frode Myklebust)
Scott Fadden
sfadden at us.ibm.com
Wed Nov 9 18:24:15 GMT 2016
So you are using the NSD protocol for data transfers over multi-cluster?
If so the TCP and thread tuning should help as well.
Scott Fadden
Spectrum Scale - Technical Marketing
Phone: (503) 880-5833
sfadden at us.ibm.com
http://www.ibm.com/systems/storage/spectrum/scale
From: Jake Carroll <jake.carroll at uq.edu.au>
To: "gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org"
<gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org>
Date: 11/09/2016 10:09 AM
Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Tuning AFM for high throughput/high
IO over _really_ long distances (Jan-Frode Myklebust)
Sent by: gpfsug-discuss-bounces at spectrumscale.org
Hi jf…
>> Mostly curious, don't have experience in such environments, but ...
Is this
AFM over NFS or NSD protocol? Might be interesting to try the other
option
-- and also check how nsdperf performs over such distance/latency.
As it turns out, it seems, very few people do.
I will test nsdperf over it and see how it performs. And yes, it is AFM →
AFM. No NFS involved here!
-jc
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 17:39:05 +0000
From: Jake Carroll <jake.carroll at uq.edu.au>
To: "gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org"
<gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org>
Subject: [gpfsug-discuss] Tuning AFM for high throughput/high IO over
_really_ long distances
Message-ID: <83652C3D-0802-4CC2-B636-9FAA31EF5AF0 at uq.edu.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Hi.
I?ve got an GPFS to GPFS AFM cache/home (IW) relationship set up over
a really long distance. About 180ms of latency between the two clusters
and around 13,000km of optical path. Fortunately for me, I?ve actually got
near theoretical maximum IO over the NIC?s between the clusters and I?m
iPerf?ing at around 8.90 to 9.2Gbit/sec over a 10GbE circuit. All MTU9000
all the way through.
Anyway ? I?m finding my AFM traffic to be dragging its feet and I
don?t really understand why that might be. I?ve verified the links and
transports ability as I said above with iPerf, and CERN?s FDT to near
10Gbit/sec.
I also verified the clusters on both sides in terms of disk IO and
they both seem easily capable in IOZone and IOR tests of multiple GB/sec
of throughput.
So ? my questions:
1. Are there very specific tunings AFM needs for high
latency/long distance IO?
2. Are there very specific NIC/TCP-stack tunings (beyond the
type of thing we already have in place) that benefits AFM over really long
distances and high latency?
3. We are seeing on the ?cache? side really lazy/sticky ?ls
?als? in the home mount. It sometimes takes 20 to 30 seconds before the
command line will report back with a long listing of files. Any ideas why
it?d take that long to get a response from ?home?.
We?ve got our TCP stack setup fairly aggressively, on all hosts that
participate in these two clusters.
ethtool -C enp2s0f0 adaptive-rx off
ifconfig enp2s0f0 txqueuelen 10000
sysctl -w net.core.rmem_max=536870912
sysctl -w net.core.wmem_max=536870912
sysctl -w net.ipv4.tcp_rmem="4096 87380 268435456"
sysctl -w net.ipv4.tcp_wmem="4096 65536 268435456"
sysctl -w net.core.netdev_max_backlog=250000
sysctl -w net.ipv4.tcp_congestion_control=htcp
sysctl -w net.ipv4.tcp_mtu_probing=1
I modified a couple of small things on the AFM ?cache? side to see if
it?d make a difference such as:
mmchconfig afmNumWriteThreads=4
mmchconfig afmNumReadThreads=4
But no difference so far.
Thoughts would be appreciated. I?ve done this before over much shorter
distances (30Km) and I?ve flattened a 10GbE wire without really
tuning?anything. Are my large in-flight-packets
numbers/long-time-to-acknowledgement semantics going to hurt here? I
really thought AFM might be well designed for exactly this kind of work at
long distance *and* high throughput ? so I must be missing something!
-jc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
http://gpfsug.org/pipermail/gpfsug-discuss/attachments/20161109/d4f4d9a7/attachment-0001.html
>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2016 18:05:21 +0000
From: Jan-Frode Myklebust <janfrode at tanso.net>
To: "gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org"
<gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org>
Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Tuning AFM for high throughput/high IO
over _really_ long distances
Message-ID:
<CAHwPathy=4z=jDXN5qa3ys+Z-_7n=tsJh7cZ3ZKzFwQMG34zwg at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mostly curious, don't have experience in such environments, but ... Is
this
AFM over NFS or NSD protocol? Might be interesting to try the other
option
-- and also check how nsdperf performs over such distance/latency.
-jf
ons. 9. nov. 2016 kl. 18.39 skrev Jake Carroll
<jake.carroll at uq.edu.au>:
> Hi.
>
>
>
> I?ve got an GPFS to GPFS AFM cache/home (IW) relationship set up
over a
> really long distance. About 180ms of latency between the two
clusters and
> around 13,000km of optical path. Fortunately for me, I?ve actually
got near
> theoretical maximum IO over the NIC?s between the clusters and I?m
> iPerf?ing at around 8.90 to 9.2Gbit/sec over a 10GbE circuit. All
MTU9000
> all the way through.
>
>
>
> Anyway ? I?m finding my AFM traffic to be dragging its feet and I
don?t
> really understand why that might be. I?ve verified the links and
transports
> ability as I said above with iPerf, and CERN?s FDT to near
10Gbit/sec.
>
>
>
> I also verified the clusters on both sides in terms of disk IO and
they
> both seem easily capable in IOZone and IOR tests of multiple GB/sec
of
> throughput.
>
>
>
> So ? my questions:
>
>
>
> 1. Are there very specific tunings AFM needs for high
latency/long
> distance IO?
>
> 2. Are there very specific NIC/TCP-stack tunings (beyond the
type
> of thing we already have in place) that benefits AFM over really
long
> distances and high latency?
>
> 3. We are seeing on the ?cache? side really lazy/sticky ?ls
?als?
> in the home mount. It sometimes takes 20 to 30 seconds before the
command
> line will report back with a long listing of files. Any ideas why
it?d take
> that long to get a response from ?home?.
>
>
>
> We?ve got our TCP stack setup fairly aggressively, on all hosts that
> participate in these two clusters.
>
>
>
> ethtool -C enp2s0f0 adaptive-rx off
>
> ifconfig enp2s0f0 txqueuelen 10000
>
> sysctl -w net.core.rmem_max=536870912
>
> sysctl -w net.core.wmem_max=536870912
>
> sysctl -w net.ipv4.tcp_rmem="4096 87380 268435456"
>
> sysctl -w net.ipv4.tcp_wmem="4096 65536 268435456"
>
> sysctl -w net.core.netdev_max_backlog=250000
>
> sysctl -w net.ipv4.tcp_congestion_control=htcp
>
> sysctl -w net.ipv4.tcp_mtu_probing=1
>
>
>
> I modified a couple of small things on the AFM ?cache? side to see
if it?d
> make a difference such as:
>
>
>
> mmchconfig afmNumWriteThreads=4
>
> mmchconfig afmNumReadThreads=4
>
>
>
> But no difference so far.
>
>
>
> Thoughts would be appreciated. I?ve done this before over much
shorter
> distances (30Km) and I?ve flattened a 10GbE wire without really
> tuning?anything. Are my large in-flight-packets
> numbers/long-time-to-acknowledgement semantics going to hurt here? I
really
> thought AFM might be well designed for exactly this kind of work at
long
> distance **and** high throughput ? so I must be missing something!
>
>
>
> -jc
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gpfsug-discuss mailing list
> gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
> http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
http://gpfsug.org/pipermail/gpfsug-discuss/attachments/20161109/f44369ab/attachment.html
>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
End of gpfsug-discuss Digest, Vol 58, Issue 12
**********************************************
_______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gpfsug.org/pipermail/gpfsug-discuss_gpfsug.org/attachments/20161109/a3656a78/attachment.htm>
More information about the gpfsug-discuss
mailing list