Open Stack

Hi James,

This is awesome. I seem to have misplaced my 540-node cluster. ;-)

Is it possible for you to also patch in
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/132372/ ? In my rally testing of port
retrieval, this one probably made the most significant improvement.


On Nov 12, 2014 9:26 AM, "James Page" <james.page at ubuntu.com> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> Hi Ihar
>
> On 11/11/14 19:39, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote:
> >> there is a series of Neutron backports in the Juno queue that are
> >>
> >>> intended to significantly improve service performance when
> >>> handling security groups (one of the issues that are main pain
> >>> points of current users): - https://review.openstack.org/130101
> >>> - https://review.openstack.org/130098 -
> >>> https://review.openstack.org/130100 -
> >>> https://review.openstack.org/130097 -
> >>> https://review.openstack.org/130105 The first four patches are
> >>> optimizing db side (controller), while the last one is to avoid
> >>> fetching security group rules by OVS agent when firewall is
> >>> disabled.
>
> In terms of putting some figures around how these proposed stable
> patches help improve a Neutron based Juno cloud, I can provide some
> metrics based on recent testing that Canonical did in-conjuction with HP.
>
> The cloud we deployed was all based on Intel Atom Quad Core processors,
> with 16G of RAM and SSD disk; 540 servers in total including 8 nova
> controllers and 4 neutron controllers.  OpenStack Juno release on
> Ubuntu 14.04.
>
> With around 12,000 running instances, which was as far as I could push
> a vanilla ML2/ovs based Juno cloud, the load on the 4 neutron
> controllers was around 40 with CPU maxing out all of the time - which
> pretty much mean't it was impossible to create any new instances due
> to vif plugging timeouts in nova waiting for neutron to complete
> network setup.
>
> I patched in:
>
>   https://review.openstack.org/#/c/130101/
>   https://review.openstack.org/#/c/130098/
>   https://review.openstack.org/#/c/130100/
>   https://review.openstack.org/#/c/130105/
>
> and re-ran the same test; the messaging load on the RabbitMQ server at
> 12,000 instances was considerably less in terms of volume, and the
> load on the 4 neutron controllers was around 10 (vs 40) with CPU at
> around 55->65% utilization - so still pretty busy, but a better
> situation than without the patches.
>
> My testing was quite synthetic (boot small instances until things
> start to break) but it does illustrate the difference these patches make.
>
> HTH
>
> James
>
> - --
> James Page
> Ubuntu and Debian Developer
> james.page at ubuntu.com
> jamespage at debian.org
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1
>
> iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJUY5czAAoJEL/srsug59jDIJ8QAJAK8aWUSQGyPrcAqvKi+OE7
> vS4NhVWog1ifubPcIpDstAoELHIfQVQKaryCN7oXAzQ0Yyp68DE68mw+o8rrly2S
> 25gPebORNath1BOJMMlv5iRS0lVN30cfmRrs9nfQ5bdAE6qkaPlofG9GsGRggCG2
> feewRR9w+PFFQQ9NdsZ141FoQDtpLjhY095rEwzUhyah8spM2w2er2XiEJLHRTI/
> HcJybUSX/Nu8OV4FJ6dn+pebWv1iWgzNOV/eqCYHf1Mx9G6HrB8ZQpv486LznyX1
> PSNuiVMgUFcSWUcN1lFQSEe/ASW+G2t3/aEMKZBXiXsO3DTORtZ79oCTkzipkehj
> 18ztLr+nkCDrdGzbvkD6LWGt9F7MjTzsXao4RwGe/EiRBvcrvnHpkc5kfaW2aIb3
> +rH8pcHpfaC04y7Zy492lFrkmrXn+73c2a+hS+gS3bMmQ1bcwF+QeeXunsMajgVo
> CQW98n3HJI/jAjCBEbV5cmmw+BXQDWOHYlP+tZiAMC5Tnj42/9+K+KWZr+truhLK
> cKGFlM+vaVsykAh9KIf1E/e6G72o/kihXDUnpx/mSk27sxDILEz9ItcQRJgpQCPN
> cH3sIj+qG76NDqIhdLYs8LgyjwQI2SdOeSi+32oCCe3tnaI35FKKuRMI0oSP0HKn
> 3U7bekTsjXhlBWusW9Wb
> =WaFI
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20141112/1d891472/attachment-0001.html>