Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.
Hi, On 10/25/2014 02:38 PM, Cesar Peschiera wrote: > Hi Meji > > In three weeks i will have two Intel NIC X520-QDA1 of 40 Gb/s, according > to these link: > http://ark.intel.com/products/68672/Intel-Ethernet-Converged-Network-Adapter-X520-QDA1 > > http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/network-adapters/converged-network-adapters/ethernet-x520-qda1-brief.html > At those speeds it would be interesting to test the upcoming 3.18 kernel with the bulk network transmission patch [1] ; that should save you a bunch of cpu cycles. [1] http://lwn.net/Articles/615238 ivan > > In my Hardware setup also i have a RAID controller H710p of Dell (LSI > chipset with 1 MB of cache) and with two groups of 4 HDDs SAS 15K RPM, > each group is configured in RAID 10, this setup is applied for each > Server (the HDDs for the OS are in other RAID), obviously i don't have > much storage compared to yours. > > In these Servers i will have running DRBD 8.4.5 version > > If you want to know the result of my tests, only let me know. > > Best regards > Cesar > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Meij, Henk" <hmeij at wesleyan.edu> > To: <drbd-user at lists.linbit.com> > Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2014 5:10 PM > Subject: Re: [DRBD-user] drbd storage size > > >> a) it turns out the counter (8847740/11287100)M goes down, not up, >> deh, never noticed >> >> b) ran plain rsync across eth0 (public, with switches/routers) and >> eth1 (nic to nic) >> eth0 sent 585260755954 bytes received 10367 bytes 116690412.98 >> bytes/sec >> eth1 sent 585260755954 bytes received 10367 bytes 122580535.41 >> bytes/sec >> so my LSI raid card is behaving and DRBD is slowing the initialization >> down somehow. >> Found chapter 15 and will try some suggestions but ideas welcome. >> >> c) for grins >> version: 8.4.5 (api:1/proto:86-101) >> GIT-hash: 1d360bde0e095d495786eaeb2a1ac76888e4db96 build by >> mockbuild at Build64R6, 2014-08-17 19:26:04 >> 0: cs:SyncTarget ro:Secondary/Secondary ds:Inconsistent/UpToDate C r----- >> ns:0 nr:3601728 dw:3601408 dr:0 al:0 bm:0 lo:4 pe:11 ua:3 ap:0 ep:1 >> wo:f oos:109374215324 >> [>....................] sync'ed: 0.1% (106810756/106814272)M >> finish: 731:23:05 speed: 41,532 (31,868) want: 41,000 K/sec >> >> 100TB in 731 hours would be 30 days. Can I expect large delta data >> replication to go equally slow using DRDB? >> >> -Henk >> >> >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: drbd-user-bounces at lists.linbit.com >> [drbd-user-bounces at lists.linbit.com] on behalf of Meij, Henk >> [hmeij at wesleyan.edu] >> Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2014 9:57 AM >> To: Philipp Reisner; drbd-user at lists.linbit.com >> Subject: Re: [DRBD-user] drbd storage size >> >> Thanks for the write up y'll. I'll have to think about #3 not sure I >> grasp it fully. >> >> Last night I started a 12 TB test and started first initialization for >> observation (0 is primary). >> I have node0:eth1 wired directly into node1:eth1 with 10 foot CAT 6 >> cable (MTU=9000) >> Data from node1 to node0 >> PING 10.10.52.232 (10.10.52.232) 8970(8998) bytes of data. >> 8978 bytes from 10.10.52.232: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.316 ms >> >> This morning's progress report from node1:(drbd v8.4.5) >> >> [===>................] sync'ed: 21.7% (8847740/11287100)M >> finish: 62:50:50 speed: 40,032 (39,008) want: 68,840 K/sec >> >> which confuses me: 8.8M out of 11.3M is 77.8% synced, not? I will let >> this test finish before I do a dd attempt. >> >> iostat reveals %idle cpu 99%+ and little to no %iowait (near 0%), >> iotop confirms very little IO (<5 K/s), typical data >> Device: rrqm/s wrqm/s r/s w/s rsec/s wsec/s >> avgrq-sz avgqu-sz await svctm %util >> sdb1 0.00 231.00 0.00 156.33 0.00 79194.67 >> 506.58 0.46 2.94 1.49 23.37 >> >> Something is throttling this IO as 40M/s is about half of what I was >> hoping for. Will dig some more. >> >> -Henk >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: drbd-user-bounces at lists.linbit.com >> [drbd-user-bounces at lists.linbit.com] on behalf of Philipp Reisner >> [philipp.reisner at linbit.com] >> Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2014 9:17 AM >> To: drbd-user at lists.linbit.com >> Subject: Re: [DRBD-user] drbd storage size >> >> Am Donnerstag, 23. Oktober 2014, 08:55:03 schrieb Digimer: >>> On 23/10/14 04:00 AM, Philipp Reisner wrote: >>> > 2a) Initialize both backend devices to a known state. >>> > >>> > I.e. dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdb1 bs=$((1024*1024)) oflag=direct >>> >>> Question; >>> >>> What I've done in the past to speed up initial sync is to create the >>> DRBD device, pause-sync, then do your 'dd if=/dev/zero ...' trick to >>> /dev/drbd0. This effectively drives the resync speed to the max possible >>> and ensures full sync across both nodes. Is this a sane approach? >>> >> >> Yes, sure that is a way to do it. (I have the impression that is >> something >> form the drbd-8.3 world.) >> >> I do not know from the top of the head if that will be faster than the >> built-in background resync in drbd-8.4. >> >> Best, >> Phil >> >> _______________________________________________ >> drbd-user mailing list >> drbd-user at lists.linbit.com >> http://lists.linbit.com/mailman/listinfo/drbd-user >> _______________________________________________ >> drbd-user mailing list >> drbd-user at lists.linbit.com >> http://lists.linbit.com/mailman/listinfo/drbd-user >> _______________________________________________ >> drbd-user mailing list >> drbd-user at lists.linbit.com >> http://lists.linbit.com/mailman/listinfo/drbd-user >> > > _______________________________________________ > drbd-user mailing list > drbd-user at lists.linbit.com > http://lists.linbit.com/mailman/listinfo/drbd-user