[Beowulf] posting bonnie++ stats from our cluster: any comments about my I/O performance stats?
landman at scalableinformatics.com
Thu Sep 24 22:06:33 EDT 2009
Rahul Nabar wrote:
> I now ran bonnie++ but have trouble figuring out if my perf. stats are
> up to the mark or not. My original plan was to only estimate the IOPS
> capabilities of my existing storage setup. But then again I am quite
Best way to get IOPs data in a "standard" manner is to run the type of
test that generates 8k random reads.
I'd suggest not using bonnie++. It is, honestly, not that good for HPC
IO performance measurement. I have lots of caveats on it, having used
it for a while as a test, while looking ever more deeply at it.
I've found fio (http://freshmeat.net/projects/fio/) to be an excellent
testing tool for disk systems. To use it, compile it (requires libaio),
and then run it as
For a nice simple IOP test, try this:
This file will do 4GB of IO into a directory named /data, using an IO
depth of 32, a block size of 8k (the IOP measurement standard) with
random reads as the major operation, using standard unix IO. We have 16
simultaneous jobs doing IO, each job using 1 file. It will aggregate
all the information from each job and report it, and it will run once.
We use this to model bonnie++ and other types of workloads. It provides
a great deal of useful information.
> ignorant about the finer nuances. Hence I thought maybe I should post
> the stats. here and if anyone has comments I'd very much appreciate
> hearing them. In any case, maybe my stats help someone else sometime!
> I/O stats on live HPC systems seem hard to find.
It looks like channel bonding isn't helping you much. Is your server
channel bonded? Clients? Both?
> Data posted below. Since this is an NFS store I ran bonnie++ from both
> a NFS client compute node and the server. (head node)
> Server side bonnie++
> Client side bonnie++
> Caveat: The cluster was in production so there is a chance of
> externalities affecting my data. (am trying it hard to explain why
> some stats seem better on the client run than the server run)
> Subsidary Goal: This setup had 23 clients for NFS. In a new cluster
> that I am setting up we want to scale this up about 250 clients. Hence
> want to estimate what sort of performance I'll be looking for in the
> Storage. (I've found most conversations with vendors pretty
> non-productive with them weaving vague terms and staying as far away
> from quantitative estimates as is possible.)
Heh ... depends on the vendor. We are pretty open and free with our
numbers (to our current/prospective customers), and our test cases.
Shortly we are releasing the io-bm code for people to test single and
parallel IO, and publishing our results as we obtain them.
> (Other specs: Gigabit ethernet. RAID5 array of 5 total SAS 10k RPM
> disks. Total storage ~ 1.5 Terabyte; both server and client have 16GB
> RAM; Dell 6248 switches. Port bonding on client servers)
What RAID adapter and drives? I am assuming some sort of Dell unit.
What is the connection from the server to the network ... single gigabit
(ala Rocks clusters), or 10 GbE, or channel bonded gigabit?
Joseph Landman, Ph.D
Founder and CEO
Scalable Informatics, Inc.
email: landman at scalableinformatics.com
web : http://scalableinformatics.com
phone: +1 734 786 8423 x121
fax : +1 866 888 3112
cell : +1 734 612 4615
Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org sponsored by Penguin Computing
To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
More information about the Beowulf