[openstack-dev] [neutron] Neutron scaling datapoints?
joehuang at huawei.com
Thu Apr 16 02:03:47 UTC 2015
"In case it's helpful to see all the cases together, sync_routers (from the L3 agent) was also mentioned in other part of this thread. Plus of course the liveness reporting from all agents."
In the test report , which shows Neutron can supports up to million level ports and 100k level physical hosts, the scalability is done by one cascading Neutron to manage 100 cascaded Neutrons through current Neutron restful API. For normal Neutron, each compute node will host L2 agent/OVS, L3 agent/DVR. In the cascading Neutron layer, the L2 agent is modified to interact with regarding cascaded Neutron but not OVS, the L3 agent(DVR) is modified to interact with regarding cascaded Neutron but not linux route. That's why we call the cascaded Neutron is the backend of Neutron.
Therefore, there are only 100 compute nodes (or say agent ) required in the cascading layer, each compute node will manage one cascaded Neutron. Each cascaded Neutron can manage up to 1000 nodes (there is already report and deployment and lab test can support this). That's the scalability to 100k nodes.
Because the cloud is splited into two layer (100 nodes in the cascading layer, 1000 nodes in each cascaded layer ), even current mechanism can meet the demand for sync_routers and liveness reporting from all agents, or L2 population, DVR router update...etc.
The test report  at least prove that the layered architecture idea is feasible for Neutron scalability, even up to million level ports and 100k level nodes. The extra benefit for the layered architecture is that each cascaded Neutron can leverage different backend technology implementation, for example, one is ML2+OVS, another is OVN or ODL or Calico...
test report for million ports scalability of Neutron http://www.slideshare.net/JoeHuang7/test-report-for-open-stack-cascading-solution-to-support-1-million-v-ms-in-100-data-centers
Chaoyi Huang ( Joe Huang )
From: Neil Jerram [mailto:Neil.Jerram at metaswitch.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 9:46 PM
To: openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Neutron scaling datapoints?
Hi again Joe, (+ list)
On 11/04/15 02:00, joehuang wrote:
> Hi, Neil,
> See inline comments.
> Best Regards
> Chaoyi Huang
> From: Neil Jerram [Neil.Jerram at metaswitch.com]
> Sent: 09 April 2015 23:01
> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Neutron scaling datapoints?
> Hi Joe,
> Many thanks for your reply!
> On 09/04/15 03:34, joehuang wrote:
>> Hi, Neil,
>> From theoretic, Neutron is like a "broadcast" domain, for example, enforcement of DVR and security group has to touch each regarding host where there is VM of this project resides. Even using SDN controller, the "touch" to regarding host is inevitable. If there are plenty of physical hosts, for example, 10k, inside one Neutron, it's very hard to overcome the "broadcast storm" issue under concurrent operation, that's the bottleneck for scalability of Neutron.
> I think I understand that in general terms - but can you be more
> specific about the broadcast storm? Is there one particular message
> exchange that involves broadcasting? Is it only from the server to
> agents, or are there 'broadcasts' in other directions as well?
> [[joehuang]] for example, L2 population, Security group rule update, DVR route update. Both direction in different scenario.
Thanks. In case it's helpful to see all the cases together, sync_routers (from the L3 agent) was also mentioned in other part of this thread. Plus of course the liveness reporting from all agents.
> (I presume you are talking about control plane messages here, i.e.
> between Neutron components. Is that right? Obviously there can also
> be broadcast storm problems in the data plane - but I don't think
> that's what you are talking about here.)
> [[joehuang]] Yes, controll plane here.
Thanks for confirming that.
>> We need layered architecture in Neutron to solve the "broadcast
>> domain" bottleneck of scalability. The test report from OpenStack
>> cascading shows that through layered architecture "Neutron
>> cascading", Neutron can supports up to million level ports and 100k
>> level physical hosts. You can find the report here:
> Many thanks, I will take a look at this.
It was very interesting, thanks. And by following through your links I also learned more about Nova cells, and about how some people question whether we need any kind of partitioning at all, and should instead solve scaling/performance problems in other ways... It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
I'd still like to see more information, though, about how far people have scaled OpenStack - and in particular Neutron - as it exists today.
Surely having a consensus set of current limits is an important input into any discussion of future scaling work.
For example, Kevin mentioned benchmarking where the Neutron server processed a liveness update in <50ms and a sync_routers in 300ms.
Suppose, the liveness update time was 50ms (since I don't know in detail what that < means) and agents report liveness every 30s. Does that mean that a single Neutron server can only support 600 agents?
I'm also especially interested in the DHCP agent, because in Calico we have one of those on every compute host. We've just run tests which appeared to be hitting trouble from just 50 compute hosts onwards, and apparently because of DHCP agent communications. We need to continue looking into that and report findings properly, but if anyone already has any insights, they would be much appreciated.
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
More information about the OpenStack-dev