Open Stack

Thanks for the advice, i've run the command in NetworkNode and in a
ComputeNode and lost is 0, but missed is a high value.

NetworkNode
system at ovs-system:
lookups: hit:425667155 missed:2962922 lost:0
flows: 27
port 0: ovs-system (internal)
port 1: br-ex (internal)
port 2: br-tun (internal)
port 3: eth1
port 4: br-int (internal)
port 5: tapbdc3d959-d8 (internal)
port 6: gre_system (gre: df_default=false, ttl=0)
port 7: qr-4063db49-6b (internal)
port 8: qg-e427e527-92 (internal)


ComputeNode
system at ovs-system:
lookups: hit:28660666 missed:200922 lost:0
flows: 19
port 0: ovs-system (internal)
port 1: br-int (internal)
port 2: br-tun (internal)
port 3: gre_system (gre: df_default=false, ttl=0)
port 4: em1
port 5: br-private (internal)
port 6: qvo9a959049-a0
port 7: qvodd0ef077-e1
port 8: qvoac2b566b-65
port 9: qvo9e4ab149-5c
port 10: qvoc2d2625c-0c
port 11: qvo3069daeb-4a
port 12: qvo7f82a3cf-0c
port 13: qvo83b77d2d-1a
port 14: qvobbadd8c2-30
port 15: qvocfd0b8e8-ad
port 16: qvo714fab88-60
port 17: qvob9ddde49-86
port 18: qvo42ef9f3b-ac
port 19: qvof4ae7868-41
port 20: qvoa4408a18-03
port 22: qvo36c64d52-9b

On 11 December 2014 at 06:17, mad Engineer <themadengin33r at gmail.com> wrote:

> sorry its 2.3.0 not 2.1.3
>
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 2:43 PM, mad Engineer <themadengin33r at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Not in openstack,i had performance issue, with OVS and bursty traffic
> > upgrading to later version improved the performance.A lot of
> > performance features have been added in  2.1.3.
> >
> > Do you have lots of lost: value in
> > ovs-dpctl show
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 2:33 AM, André Aranha <andre.f.aranha at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> Yes, we are using version 2.0.2.
> >> The process uses only about 0.3% on network node and compute node.
> >> Did you have the same issue?
> >>
> >> On 10 December 2014 at 14:31, mad Engineer <themadengin33r at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> are you using openvswitch? which version?
> >>> if yes,is it consuming a lot of CPU?
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 7:45 PM, André Aranha <
> andre.f.aranha at gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> > Well, here we are using de Icehouse with Ubuntu 14.04 LTS
> >>> >
> >>> > We found this thread in the community  and we apply the changes in
> the
> >>> > compute nodes (change VHOST_NET_ENABLED to 1 in
> /etc/default/qemu-kvm).
> >>> > After do this, a few instances the problem doesn't exists anymore.
> This
> >>> > link
> >>> > show an investigation to find the problem.
> >>> >
> >>> > About the MTU in our cloud (using iperf),
> >>> >
> >>> > 1-from any the Desktop to the Network Node
> >>> > MSS size 1448 bytes (MTU 1500 bytes, ethernet)
> >>> >
> >>> > 2-from any Desktop to the instance
> >>> > MSS size 1348 bytes (MTU 1388 bytes, unknown interface)
> >>> >
> >>> > 3- from any instance to the Network Node
> >>> > MSS size 1348 bytes (MTU 1388 bytes, unknown interface)
> >>> >
> >>> > 4- from any instance to the Desktop
> >>> > MSS size 1348 bytes (MTU 1388 bytes, unknown interface)
> >>> >
> >>> > 5-from Network Node to any ComputeNode
> >>> > MSS size 1448 bytes (MTU 1500 bytes, ethernet)
> >>> >
> >>> > 6-from any ComputeNode to NetworkNode
> >>> > MSS size 1448 bytes (MTU 1500 bytes, ethernet)
> >>> >
> >>> > On 10 December 2014 at 10:31, somshekar kadam <som_kadam at yahoo.co.in
> >
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Sorry for wrong post mail chain.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Regards
> >>> >> Neelu
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On Wednesday, 10 December 2014 6:59 PM, somshekar kadam
> >>> >> <som_kadam at yahoo.co.in> wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Hi All,
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Please recommend which stable Host OS to use for Controller and
> Compute
> >>> >> node.
> >>> >> I have tried Fedora20 seems lot of tweaking is required, corerct me
> If
> >>> >> I
> >>> >> am wrong.
> >>> >> I see that most of it is tested on ubuntu and centos.
> >>> >> I am planning to use JUNO stable version.
> >>> >> Please help on this
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Regards
> >>> >> Neelu
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On Wednesday, 10 December 2014 5:42 PM, Hannah Fordham
> >>> >> <hfordham at radiantworlds.com> wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I'm afraid we didn't, we're still struggling with some VMs with this
> >>> >> problem. Sorry!
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On 9 December 2014 14:09:32 GMT+00:00, "André Aranha"
> >>> >> <andre.f.aranha at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Hi,
> >>> >>
> >>> >> We are with the same issue here, and already try some solutions that
> >>> >> didn't work at all. Did you solved this problem?
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Thank you,
> >>> >> Andre Aranha
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On 27 August 2014 at 08:17, Hannah Fordham <
> hfordham at radiantworlds.com>
> >>> >> wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I’ve been trying to figure this one out for a while, so I’ll try
> and be
> >>> >> as
> >>> >> thorough as possible in this post but apologies if I miss anything
> >>> >> pertinent
> >>> >> out.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> First off, I’m running a set up with one control node and 5 compute
> >>> >> nodes,
> >>> >> all created using the Stackgeek scripts -
> >>> >> http://www.stackgeek.com/guides/gettingstarted.html. The first two
> >>> >> (compute1
> >>> >> and compute 2) were created at the same time, compute3, 4 and 5 were
> >>> >> added
> >>> >> as needed later. My VMs are predominantly CentOS, while my Openstack
> >>> >> nodes
> >>> >> are Ubuntu 14.04.1
> >>> >>
> >>> >> The symptom: irregular high latency/packet loss to VMs on all
> compute
> >>> >> boxes except compute3. Mostly a pain when trying to do anything via
> ssh
> >>> >> on a
> >>> >> VM because the lag makes it difficult to do anything, but it shows
> >>> >> itself
> >>> >> quite nicely through pings as well:
> >>> >> --- 10.0.102.47 ping statistics ---
> >>> >> 111 packets transmitted, 103 received, 7% packet loss, time 110024ms
> >>> >> rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.096/367.220/5593.100/1146.920 ms, pipe 6
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I have tested these pings:
> >>> >> VM to itself (via its external IP) seems fine
> >>> >> VM to another VM is not fine
> >>> >> Hosting compute node to VM is not fine
> >>> >> My PC to VM is not fine (however the other way round works fine)
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Top on a (32 core) compute node with laggy VMs:
> >>> >> top - 12:09:20 up 33 days, 21:35,  1 user,  load average: 2.37,
> 4.95,
> >>> >> 6.23
> >>> >> Tasks: 431 total,   2 running, 429 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie
> >>> >> %Cpu(s):  0.6 us,  3.4 sy,  0.0 ni, 96.0 id,  0.0 wa,  0.0 hi,  0.0
> si,
> >>> >> 0.0 st
> >>> >> KiB Mem:  65928256 total, 44210348 used, 21717908 free,   341172
> >>> >> buffers
> >>> >> KiB Swap:  7812092 total,  1887864 used,  5924228 free.  7134740
> cached
> >>> >> Mem
> >>> >>
> >>> >> And for comparison, on the one compute node that doesn’t seem to be
> >>> >> suffering from this:
> >>> >> top - 12:12:20 up 33 days, 21:38,  1 user,  load average: 0.28,
> 0.18,
> >>> >> 0.15
> >>> >> Tasks: 399 total,   3 running, 396 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie
> >>> >> %Cpu(s):  0.3 us,  0.1 sy,  0.0 ni, 98.9 id,  0.6 wa,  0.0 hi,  0.0
> si,
> >>> >> 0.0 st
> >>> >> KiB Mem:  65928256 total, 49986064 used, 15942192 free,   335788
> >>> >> buffers
> >>> >> KiB Swap:  7812092 total,   919392 used,  6892700 free. 39272312
> cached
> >>> >> Mem
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Top on a laggy VM:
> >>> >> top - 11:02:53 up 27 days, 33 min,  3 users,  load average: 0.00,
> 0.00,
> >>> >> 0.00
> >>> >> Tasks:  91 total,   1 running,  90 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie
> >>> >> Cpu(s):  0.2%us,  0.1%sy,  0.0%ni, 99.5%id,  0.1%wa,  0.0%hi,
> 0.0%si,
> >>> >> 0.0%st
> >>> >> Mem:   1020400k total,   881004k used,   139396k free,   162632k
> >>> >> buffers
> >>> >> Swap:  1835000k total,    14984k used,  1820016k free,   220644k
> cached
> >>> >>
> >>> >> http://imgur.com/blULjDa shows the hypervisor panel of Horizon. As
> you
> >>> >> can
> >>> >> see, Compute 3 has fewer resources used, but none of the compute
> nodes
> >>> >> should be anywhere near overloaded from what I can tell.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Any ideas? Let me know if I’m missing anything obvious that would
> help
> >>> >> with figuring this out!
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Hannah
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> ***********
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Radiant Worlds Limited is registered in England (company no:
> 07822337).
> >>> >> This message is intended solely for the addressee and may contain
> >>> >> confidential information. If you have received this message in error
> >>> >> please
> >>> >> send it back to us and immediately and permanently delete it from
> your
> >>> >> system. Do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in
> this
> >>> >> message or in any attachment. Please also note that transmission
> cannot
> >>> >> be
> >>> >> guaranteed to be secure or error-free.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> _______________________________________________
> >>> >> Mailing list:
> >>> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> >>> >> Post to     : openstack at lists.openstack.org
> >>> >> Unsubscribe :
> >>> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> --
> >>> >> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> ***********
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Radiant Worlds Limited is registered in England (company no:
> 07822337).
> >>> >> This message is intended solely for the addressee and may contain
> >>> >> confidential information. If you have received this message in error
> >>> >> please
> >>> >> send it back to us and immediately and permanently delete it from
> your
> >>> >> system. Do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in
> this
> >>> >> message or in any attachment. Please also note that transmission
> cannot
> >>> >> be
> >>> >> guaranteed to be secure or error-free.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> _______________________________________________
> >>> >> Mailing list:
> >>> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> >>> >> Post to    : openstack at lists.openstack.org
> >>> >> Unsubscribe :
> >>> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> _______________________________________________
> >>> >> Mailing list:
> >>> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> >>> >> Post to    : openstack at lists.openstack.org
> >>> >> Unsubscribe :
> >>> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > _______________________________________________
> >>> > Mailing list:
> >>> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> >>> > Post to     : openstack at lists.openstack.org
> >>> > Unsubscribe :
> >>> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> >>> >
> >>
> >>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack/attachments/20141211/379d074a/attachment.html>