Open Stack

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 12:01 PM, Ivan Kolodyazhny <e0ne at e0ne.info> wrote:

> + [sahara] because they are primary consumer of the BDD.
>
> John,
> Thanks for the answer. My comments are inline.
>
> Regards,
> Ivan Kolodyazhny,
> http://blog.e0ne.info/
>
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 4:41 PM, John Griffith <john.griffith8 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 4:43 AM, Ivan Kolodyazhny <e0ne at e0ne.info> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi team,
>>>
>>> We did some performance tests [1] for LVM and BDD drivers. All tests
>>> were executed on real hardware with OpenStack Mitaka release.
>>> Unfortunately, we didn't have enough time to execute all tests and compare
>>> results. We used Sahara/Hadoop cluster with TestDFSIO and others tests.
>>>
>>> All tests were executed on the same hardware and OpenStack release. Only
>>> difference were in cinder.conf to enable needed backend and/or target
>>> driver.
>>>
>>> Tests were executed on following configurations:
>>>
>>>    - LVM +TGT target
>>>    - LVM+LocalTarget: PoC based on [2] spec
>>>    - LVM+LIO
>>>    - Block Device Driver.
>>>
>>>
>>> Feel free to ask question if any about our testing infrastructure,
>>> environment, etc.
>>>
>>>
>>> [1] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qS_ClylqdbtbrVSvwbbD
>>> pdWNf2lZPR_ndtW6n54GJX0/edit?usp=sharing
>>> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/247880/
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Ivan Kolodyazhny,
>>> http://blog.e0ne.info/
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> ______________
>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.op
>>> enstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>
>>> ​Thanks Ivan, so I'd like to propose we (the Cinder team) discuss a few
>> things (again):
>>
>> 1. Deprecate the BDD driver
>>  Based on the data here LVM+LIO the delta in performance ​(with the
>> exception of the Terravalidate run against 3TB) doesn't seem significant
>> enough to warrant maintaining an additional driver that has only a subset
>> of features implemented.  It would be good to understand why that
>> particular test has such a significant peformance gap.
>>
> What about Local Target? Does it make sense to implement it instead BDD?
>
​Maybe I'm missing something, what would the advantage be?  LVM+LIO and
LVM+LOCAL-TARGET seem pretty close.  In the interest of simplicity and
maintenance just thinking maybe it would be worth considering just using
LVM+LIO across the board.
​


>
>> 2. Consider getting buy off to move the default implementation to use the
>> LIO driver and consider deprecating the TGT driver
>>
> +1. Let's bring this topic for the next weekly meeting.
>
>
>
>>
>> I realize this probably isn't a sufficient enough data set to make those
>> two decisions but I think it's at least enough to have a more informed
>> discussion this time.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> John​
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> ______________
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscrib
>> e
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> 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/20160919/0c0c38c8/attachment.html>