Do you have NICs that support iSCSI -I guess you can use hardware offloading?
MTU size ?
Lattency is usually the killer of any performance, what is your round-trip time ?
На 21 юли 2020 г. 2:37:10 GMT+03:00, Philip Brown <pbrown(a)medata.com> написа:
>AAAAAH! my apologies. It seemed very odd, so I reviewed, and discovered
>that I messed up my testing of direct lun.
>updated results are improved from my previous email, but not any better
>than going through normal storage domain.
>18156: 61.714: IO Summary: 110396 ops, 1836.964 ops/s, (921/907 r/w),
>3.6mb/s, 949us cpu/op, 27.3ms latency
>17095: 61.794: IO Summary: 123458 ops, 2052.922 ops/s, (1046/996 r/w),
> 4.0mb/s, 858us cpu/op, 60.4ms latency
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Philip Brown" <pbrown(a)medata.com>
>To: "Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini(a)redhat.com>
>Cc: "Nir Soffer" <nsoffer(a)redhat.com>, "users"
>"qemu-block" <qemu-block(a)nongnu.org>, "Stefan Hajnoczi"
><stefanha(a)redhat.com>, "Sergio Lopez Pascual" <slp(a)redhat.com>,
>"Mordechai Lehrer" <mlehrer(a)redhat.com>
>Sent: Monday, July 20, 2020 4:30:32 PM
>Subject: Re: [ovirt-users] very very bad iscsi performance
>FYI, I just tried it with direct lun.
>it is as bad or worse.
>I dont know about that sg io vs qemu initiator, but here is the
>15223: 62.824: IO Summary: 83751 ops, 1387.166 ops/s, (699/681 r/w),
>2.7mb/s, 619us cpu/op, 281.4ms latency
>15761: 62.268: IO Summary: 77610 ops, 1287.908 ops/s, (649/632 r/w),
>2.5mb/s, 686us cpu/op, 283.0ms latency
>16397: 61.812: IO Summary: 94065 ops, 1563.781 ops/s, (806/750 r/w),
>3.0mb/s, 894us cpu/op, 217.3ms latency
>Users mailing list -- users(a)ovirt.org
>To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)ovirt.org
>Privacy Statement: https://www.ovirt.org/privacy-policy.html
>oVirt Code of Conduct: