There should be no problem running vdbench with open-fcoe.  Even though we do 
not routinely run vdbench, we never encountered issue you reported.  I just run 
a simple vdbench (v5.02) test on a RHEL6.2 system and the IO appears 
successfully from 512 bytes to 1024Kb.  

I am not sure whether your target setup is correct, not sure what is COMSTAR.  
Have your tried other IO tools (not necessary performance bench mark tool) to 
see whether you can run IO successfully? 


-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On 
Behalf Of Zou, Yi
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 10:25 AM
To: Jevon
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Open-FCoE] Ask help about performance test on Open-FCoE

> 
> Hi Yi and Experts,
> 
> Currently, I am trying to do a performance test by running a benchmark 
> tool vdbench on Open-FCoE. For this, I established an environment with 
> one initiator based on Ixgbe under Linux 2.6.32 and 22 COMSTAR LUNs in 
> the target under Solaris 11. The COMSTAR LUNS are based on the SCSI 
> target. The block size used in the test covers 1k, 2k, 4k, 8k, ..., 128k.
> 
> During the test I encountered two problems. One was the vdbench was 
> always interruptted while executing the little-size block I/O such as 
> 1k,2k.
> After starting the size from 32k, the test can successfully finish.
I never used vdbench, fio/dd/iozone are what I normally use. Someone in the 
list who have the experience may know better about vdbench.

> 
> The other was about the test results. Take the 64k block size I/O test 
> for example, the mean throughput was about 57000MB/sec, that was 
> indeed impossible under current technology.  For this problem, my 
> colleague doubted it was due to the effect of the file system's cache. 
> Then, I googled how to bypass the cache, but unfortunately, I could 
> not find an useful one. At last, I moved to use 'ram' to bind the LUNs 
> to some raw disks.  Also, some error came out, it said "opening 
> `/devices/virtual/raw/raw3': No such file or directory", even if I 
> configured the raw disk by editing /etc/udev/rules.d/60-raw.rules.
The throughput number you have here does not look right to me. I don't know 
your setup, what devices are there in you 'fcoeadm -t' output? Can you simply 
do dd over those devices before doing vdbench? FCoE would be in ' 
/sys/devices/virtual/net/ethX' where ethX is what you pass to fcoeadm to create 
FCoE instance on, also available from 'fcoeadm -i'

Make sure vdbench is pointing to the actual LUNs discovered by fcoe. For Intel 
82599 nics, do 'ethtool -S | grep fcoe' would give you statistics, Observe the 
counters while run your i/o to verify fcoe traffic is actually happing on that 
nic port (or alternative run tshark)


> 
> For the above problems, did any expert have any solutions to them? Had 
> anyone tested the performance of Open-FCoE or known any benchmark tool 
> under Linux?
> 
> I am looking forward to your expert's reply, thanks so much in advance.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Jevon
> 
> Following is the log corresponding to the above problems:
> 
> Problem1: the error msg.
> 
> 01:07:30.979 Slave aborted. Abort message received:
> 01:07:30.980 Task WG_task stopped after 3 minutes of trying to get it 
> to terminate itself. Unpredictable results may occur.
> 01:07:30.980
> 01:07:30.980 Look at file localhost-0.stdout.html for more information.
Have you found anything from the above output file?

yi

> 01:07:30.980
> 01:07:30.981 Slave localhost-0 prematurely terminated.
> 01:07:30.981
> java.lang.RuntimeException: Slave localhost-0 prematurely terminated.
>      at Vdb.common.failure(common.java:234)
>      at Vdb.SlaveStarter.startSlave(SlaveStarter.java:185)
>      at Vdb.SlaveStarter.run(SlaveStarter.java:68)
> 01:07:31.984 common.exit(): -99
> common.exit(): -99
> 
> 
> Problem 2: incorrect results
> 
> 19:18:30.881 All slaves are now connected
> 19:18:32.001 Starting RD=IOPS_RO_CACHE; I/O rate: Uncontrolled MAX; 
> Elapsed=160; For loops: xfersize=65536 threads=10
> 
> Mar 25, 2012 interval        i/o   MB/sec   bytes   read     resp
> resp     resp    cpu%  cpu%
>                              rate  1024**2     i/o    pct     time
> max   stddev sys+usr   sys
> 19:18:38.074        1  915879.83 57242.49   65536 100.00    0.017
> 3.208    0.004    74.2  58.5
> 19:18:44.048        2  923004.00 57687.75   65536 100.00    0.017
> 3.121    0.003    86.5  68.5
> 19:18:50.049        3  914239.33 57139.96   65536 100.00    0.017
> 1.994    0.003    86.6  68.6
> 19:18:56.050        4  916271.67 57266.98   65536 100.00    0.017
> 0.983    0.003    86.6  68.5
> 19:19:02.056        5  916500.33 57281.27   65536 100.00    0.017
> 1.566    0.003    86.5  68.6
> 19:19:08.046        6  921123.83 57570.24   65536 100.00    0.017
> 0.617    0.003    86.7  68.8
> 19:19:14.046        7  921845.17 57615.32   65536 100.00    0.017
> 2.264    0.003    86.9  68.9
> 19:19:20.047        8  921880.83 57617.55   65536 100.00    0.017
> 1.999    0.003    86.6  68.7
> 19:19:26.066        9  918347.00 57396.69   65536 100.00    0.017
> 0.955    0.003    86.3  68.4
> 19:19:32.074       10  919466.50 57466.66   65536 100.00    0.017
> 1.490    0.003    86.6  68.6
> 19:19:38.075       11  915937.50 57246.09   65536 100.00    0.017
> 1.302    0.003    86.4  68.3
> 19:19:44.048       12  922523.50 57657.72   65536 100.00    0.017
> 2.417    0.003    87.0  68.8
> 19:19:50.066       13  924455.00 57778.44   65536 100.00    0.017
> 4.046    0.003    86.9  69.0
> 19:19:56.067       14  923076.83 57692.30   65536 100.00    0.017
> 1.041    0.003    87.0  69.2
> 19:20:02.048       15  917671.33 57354.46   65536 100.00    0.017
> 1.271    0.003    86.9  68.8
> 19:20:08.046       16  918901.00 57431.31   65536 100.00    0.017
> 1.287    0.003    86.6  68.7
> 19:20:14.048       17  923838.67 57739.92   65536 100.00    0.017
> 1.059    0.003    86.6  68.4
> 19:20:20.051       18  921362.17 57585.14   65536 100.00    0.017
> 3.675    0.003    86.8  68.8
> 19:20:26.047       19  922135.00 57633.44   65536 100.00    0.017
> 0.820    0.003    86.7  68.7
> 19:20:32.056       20  926624.33 57914.02   65536 100.00    0.017
> 1.014    0.003    86.7  69.0
> 19:20:38.046       21  925666.83 57854.18   65536 100.00    0.017
> 1.620    0.003    86.7  68.9
> 19:20:44.057       22  925109.33 57819.33   65536 100.00    0.017
> 1.010    0.003    86.6  68.8
> 19:20:50.049       23  914419.83 57151.24   65536 100.00    0.017
> 1.953    0.003    86.6  68.7
> 19:20:56.051       24  918441.33 57402.58   65536 100.00    0.017
> 0.615    0.003    86.7  68.7
> 19:21:02.051       25  919283.00 57455.19   65536 100.00    0.017
> 1.987    0.003    86.8  68.9
> 19:21:08.048       26  920740.50 57546.28   65536 100.00    0.017
> 1.588    0.003    86.6  68.7
> 19:21:08.050 avg_2-26  920514.59 57532.16   65536 100.00    0.017
> 4.046    0.003    86.7  68.7
> 19:21:08.050 *
> 19:21:08.050 host=localhost
> 19:21:08.050 * Warning: average processor utilization 86.69%
> 19:21:08.050 * Any processor utilization over 80% could mean that your 
> system
> 19:21:08.050 * does not have enough cycles to run the highest rate 
> possible
> 19:21:08.050 *
> 19:21:09.001 Starting RD=IOPS_RO_CACHE; I/O rate: Uncontrolled MAX; 
> Elapsed=160; For loops: xfersize=131072 threads=10
> 19:28:59.067 avg_2-26  467986.12 58498.26  131072   0.00    0.041
> 8.290    0.009    87.0  79.4
> 19:28:59.067 *
> 19:28:59.067 host=localhost
> 19:28:59.068 * Warning: average processor utilization 87.04%
> 19:28:59.068 * Any processor utilization over 80% could mean that your 
> system
> 19:28:59.068 * does not have enough cycles to run the highest rate 
> possible
> 19:28:59.068 *
> 19:28:59.508 Slave localhost-0 terminated
> 19:28:59.508 Slave localhost-6 terminated
> 19:28:59.509 Slave localhost-4 terminated
> 19:28:59.514 Slave localhost-1 terminated
> 19:28:59.515 Slave localhost-5 terminated
> 19:28:59.520 Vdbench execution completed successfully. Output directory:
> /usr/fcoe-perf/vdb5/output
> 19:28:59.520 Slave localhost-2 terminated
> 19:28:59.522 Slave localhost-7 terminated
> 19:28:59.523 Slave localhost-3 terminated
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.open-fcoe.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.open-fcoe.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Reply via email to