[Users] Extremely poor disk access speeds in Windows guest

Sat Jan 25 05:25:48 UTC 2014

On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 7:01 AM, Steve Dainard <sdainard at miovision.com>wrote:

> Not sure what a good method to bench this would be, but:
>
> An NFS mount point on virt host:
> [root at ovirt001 iso-store]# dd if=/dev/zero of=test1 bs=4k count=100000
> 100000+0 records in
> 100000+0 records out
> 409600000 bytes (410 MB) copied, 3.95399 s, 104 MB/s
>
> Raw brick performance on gluster server (yes, I know I shouldn't write
> directly to the brick):
> [root at gluster1 iso-store]# dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=4k count=100000
> 100000+0 records in
> 100000+0 records out
> 409600000 bytes (410 MB) copied, 3.06743 s, 134 MB/s
>
> Gluster mount point on gluster server:
> [root at gluster1 iso-store]#
> dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=4k count=100000
> 100000+0 records in
> 100000+0 records out
> 409600000 bytes (410 MB) copied, 19.5766 s, 20.9 MB/s
>
> The storage servers are a bit older, but are both dual socket quad core
> opterons with 4x 7200rpm drives.
>
> I'm in the process of setting up a share from my desktop and I'll see if I
> can bench between the two systems. Not sure if my ssd will impact the
> tests, I've heard there isn't an advantage using ssd storage for glusterfs.
>
> Does anyone have a hardware reference design for glusterfs as a backend
> for virt? Or is there a benchmark utility?
>

Check this thread out,
http://raobharata.wordpress.com/2012/10/29/qemu-glusterfs-native-integration/it's
quite dated but I remember seeing similar figures.

In fact when I used FIO on a libgfapi mounted VM I got slightly faster
read/write speeds than on the physical box itself (I assume because of some
level of caching). On NFS it was close to half.. You'll probably get a
little more interesting results using FIO opposed to dd

>
> *Steve Dainard *
> IT Infrastructure Manager
> Miovision <http://miovision.com/> | *Rethink Traffic*
> 519-513-2407 ex.250
> 877-646-8476 (toll-free)
>
> *Blog <http://miovision.com/blog>  |  **LinkedIn
> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/miovision-technologies>  |  Twitter
> <https://twitter.com/miovision>  |  Facebook
> <https://www.facebook.com/miovision>*
> ------------------------------
>  Miovision Technologies Inc. | 148 Manitou Drive, Suite 101, Kitchener,
> ON, Canada | N2C 1L3
> This e-mail may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If
> you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any
> attachments and notify us immediately.
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 7:18 PM, Andrew Cathrow <acathrow at redhat.com>wrote:
>
>> Are we sure that the issue is the guest I/O - what's the raw performance
>> on the host accessing the gluster storage?
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> *From: *"Steve Dainard" <sdainard at miovision.com>
>> *To: *"Itamar Heim" <iheim at redhat.com>
>> *Cc: *"Ronen Hod" <rhod at redhat.com>, "users" <users at ovirt.org>, "Sanjay
>> Rao" <srao at redhat.com>
>> *Sent: *Thursday, January 23, 2014 4:56:58 PM
>> *Subject: *Re: [Users] Extremely poor disk access speeds in Windows guest
>>
>>
>> I have two options, virtio and virtio-scsi.
>>
>> I was using virtio, and have also attempted virtio-scsi on another
>> Windows guest with the same results.
>>
>> Using the newest drivers, virtio-win-0.1-74.iso.
>>
>> *Steve Dainard *
>> IT Infrastructure Manager
>> Miovision <http://miovision.com/> | *Rethink Traffic*
>> 519-513-2407 ex.250
>> 877-646-8476 (toll-free)
>>
>> *Blog <http://miovision.com/blog>  |  **LinkedIn
>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/miovision-technologies>  |  Twitter
>> <https://twitter.com/miovision>  |  Facebook
>> <https://www.facebook.com/miovision>*
>> ------------------------------
>>  Miovision Technologies Inc. | 148 Manitou Drive, Suite 101, Kitchener,
>> ON, Canada | N2C 1L3
>> This e-mail may contain information that is privileged or confidential.
>> If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any
>> attachments and notify us immediately.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 4:24 PM, Itamar Heim <iheim at redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/23/2014 07:46 PM, Steve Dainard wrote:
>>>
>>>> Backing Storage: Gluster Replica
>>>> Storage Domain: NFS
>>>> Ovirt Hosts: CentOS 6.5
>>>> Ovirt version: 3.3.2
>>>> Network: GigE
>>>> # of VM's: 3 - two Linux guests are idle, one Windows guest is
>>>> installing updates.
>>>>
>>>> I've installed a Windows 2008 R2 guest with virtio disk, and all the
>>>> drivers from the latest virtio iso. I've also installed the spice agent
>>>> drivers.
>>>>
>>>> Guest disk access is horribly slow, Resource monitor during Windows
>>>> updates shows Disk peaking at 1MB/sec (scale never increases) and Disk
>>>> Queue Length Peaking at 5 and looks to be sitting at that level 99% of
>>>> the time. 113 updates in Windows has been running solidly for about 2.5
>>>> hours and is at 89/113 updates complete.
>>>>
>>>
>>> virtio-block or virtio-scsi?
>>> which windows guest driver version for that?
>>>
>>>
>>>> I can't say my Linux guests are blisteringly fast, but updating a guest
>>>> from RHEL 6.3 fresh install to 6.5 took about 25 minutes.
>>>>
>>>> If anyone has any ideas, please let me know - I haven't found any tuning
>>>> docs for Windows guests that could explain this issue.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Steve Dainard *
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Users mailing list
>>>> Users at ovirt.org
>>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Users mailing list
>> Users at ovirt.org
>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ovirt.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20140125/c099184d/attachment-0001.html>