Nexenta/Illumos-based slow

A

Admiral

Member
Feb 23, 2015
28
0
21
Has anyone managed to get this working? With or withour Virtio disks/nic's it just takes ages to get into the webinterface
CPU : AMD FX8320 , 16 Gigs of ram
pveversion -v
proxmox-ve: 4.0-16 (running kernel: 4.2.2-1-pve)
pve-manager: 4.0-50 (running version: 4.0-50/d3a6b7e5)
pve-kernel-4.2.2-1-pve: 4.2.2-16
lvm2: 2.02.116-pve1
corosync-pve: 2.3.5-1
libqb0: 0.17.2-1
pve-cluster: 4.0-23
qemu-server: 4.0-31
pve-firmware: 1.1-7
libpve-common-perl: 4.0-32
libpve-access-control: 4.0-9
libpve-storage-perl: 4.0-27
pve-libspice-server1: 0.12.5-1
vncterm: 1.2-1
pve-qemu-kvm: 2.4-10
pve-container: 1.0-10
pve-firewall: 2.0-12
pve-ha-manager: 1.0-10
ksm-control-daemon: 1.2-1
glusterfs-client: 3.5.2-2+deb8u1
lxc-pve: 1.1.3-1
lxcfs: 0.9-pve2
cgmanager: 0.37-pve2
criu: 1.6.0-1
zfsutils: 0.6.5-pve4~jessie
 
I want to make a Nexenta or at least Illumos-based ZFS storage which i intend to pass back to proxmox over iSCSI.
The VM is really slow , especially noticeable when connecting to the webinterface of that VM.
It has been configured with 3 Vcpu's and 6 Gigs ram for now , my ZFS array will be attached with PCI-passthrough as soon as these problems can be solved
Tried switching ACPI on or af ,added/disabled the hpet-switch , did install on both ide/virtio based setup's , so I am clueless now
 
As I understand it you want to virtualize a storage server in Proxmox and use this virtualized storage to provide storage to VM in the same Proxmox cluster? This is bound to fail and should be avoided - it is like feeding the dog with its own tail!
 
This used to work in an esxi setup before though , with quite fast performance.
But this remark doesn't solve my problem though :)

Why is Solaris this slow on my setup? :) Even without the intention to make it a storage VM , the performance is really bad.
 
I can't speak for Nexenta but latest Omnios runs very well here - only for testing and development though. What is the contents of your VM's config file (/etc/pve/qemu-server/vmid.conf)?
 
@ the moment I am @ work so I don't have access .

I can give you the details that I remember :

3 sockets with 1 vcpu ( Could not get it to work with 1 socket and 3 Vcpu's)
Virtio raw disk 20 gig , writeback.
Virtio NIC.
ACPI Off , KVM 1 , Solaris OS type. 6 Gigs ram.
Cputype = host
scsihw = virtio-scsi-pci
 
If you use virtio-scsi-pci why not use SCSI disk instead of virtio? (SCSI disk and virtio-scsi-pci provides trim support)
Why ACPI off? (you will not be able to shutdown from GUI)

What OS do you run?

Mine is as told before Omnios 151014:
Code: 
balloon: 2048
boot: cdn
bootdisk: virtio0
cores: 1
cpu: Opteron_G5
ide2: none,media=cdrom
memory: 4096
name: omnios-151014
net0: virtio=98:DB:33:D9:EE:78,bridge=vmbr300
numa: 0
ostype: solaris
sockets: 2
tablet: 0
vga: qxl
virtio0: omnios_ib:vm-105-disk-1,size=12G
virtio1: omnios_ib_nfs:105/vm-105-disk-1.qcow2,format=qcow2,size=32G
virtio2: omnios_ib_nfs:105/vm-105-disk-4.qcow2,format=qcow2,size=32G
Running fio with iometer access pattern (zfs mirror):
# This job file tries to mimic the Intel IOMeter File Server Access Pattern
[global]
description=Emulation of Intel IOmeter File Server Access Pattern

[iometer]
bssplit=512/10:1k/5:2k/5:4k/60:8k/2:16k/4:32k/4:64k/10
rw=randrw
rwmixread=80
direct=0
fallocate=none
size=4g
ioengine=solarisaio
#ioengine=posixaio
# IOMeter defines the server loads as the following:
# iodepth=1 Linear
# iodepth=4 Very Light
# iodepth=8 Light
# iodepth=64 Moderate
# iodepth=256 Heavy
iodepth=64
Click to expand...
Code: 
iometer: (g=0): rw=randrw, bs=512-64K/512-64K/512-64K, ioengine=solarisaio, iodepth=64
fio-2.2.4
Starting 1 process
Jobs: 1 (f=1): [m(1)] [100.0% done] [12991KB/3081KB/0KB /s] [3050/725/0 iops] [eta 00m:00s]
iometer: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=681: Mon Oct 19 01:43:57 2015
  Description  : [Emulation of Intel IOmeter File Server Access Pattern]
  read : io=3270.8MB, bw=9636.2KB/s, iops=1576, runt=347563msec
    slat (usec): min=4, max=667866, avg=94.73, stdev=1462.62
    clat (usec): min=4, max=1026.1K, avg=5787.98, stdev=23675.15
     lat (usec): min=29, max=1026.2K, avg=5882.71, stdev=23745.05
    clat percentiles (usec):
     |  1.00th=[    5],  5.00th=[    5], 10.00th=[    5], 20.00th=[    7],
     | 30.00th=[   33], 40.00th=[   38], 50.00th=[   49], 60.00th=[  113],
     | 70.00th=[  596], 80.00th=[ 1896], 90.00th=[ 9920], 95.00th=[30336],
     | 99.00th=[117248], 99.50th=[152576], 99.90th=[264192], 99.95th=[325632],
     | 99.99th=[692224]
    bw (KB  /s): min= 1694, max=29388, per=100.00%, avg=9673.20, stdev=3394.23
  write: io=845123KB, bw=2431.6KB/s, iops=394, runt=347563msec
    slat (usec): min=6, max=162637, avg=99.81, stdev=1141.78
    clat (usec): min=5, max=1371.6K, avg=138465.63, stdev=79850.93
     lat (usec): min=75, max=1371.7K, avg=138565.44, stdev=79828.69
    clat percentiles (msec):
     |  1.00th=[    3],  5.00th=[   13], 10.00th=[   38], 20.00th=[   91],
     | 30.00th=[  106], 40.00th=[  121], 50.00th=[  133], 60.00th=[  147],
     | 70.00th=[  161], 80.00th=[  180], 90.00th=[  221], 95.00th=[  273],
     | 99.00th=[  408], 99.50th=[  482], 99.90th=[  685], 99.95th=[  816],
     | 99.99th=[  996]
    bw (KB  /s): min=  401, max= 8211, per=100.00%, avg=2439.09, stdev=858.01
    lat (usec) : 10=21.97%, 20=0.32%, 50=17.77%, 100=6.48%, 250=6.00%
    lat (usec) : 500=2.87%, 750=1.52%, 1000=1.95%
    lat (msec) : 2=5.61%, 4=4.16%, 10=4.15%, 20=3.08%, 50=3.74%
    lat (msec) : 100=4.39%, 250=14.56%, 500=1.33%, 750=0.08%, 1000=0.01%
    lat (msec) : 2000=0.01%
  cpu          : usr=71.35%, sys=18.70%, ctx=1958482, majf=0, minf=0
  IO depths    : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=0.1%, >=64=100.0%
     submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.1%, >=64=0.0%
     issued    : total=r=547974/w=137168/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0, drop=r=0/w=0/d=0
     latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=64

Run status group 0 (all jobs):
   READ: io=3270.8MB, aggrb=9636KB/s, minb=9636KB/s, maxb=9636KB/s, mint=347563msec, maxt=347563msec
  WRITE: io=845123KB, aggrb=2431KB/s, minb=2431KB/s, maxb=2431KB/s, mint=347563msec, maxt=347563msec

ps. ( Could not get it to work with 1 socket and 3 Vcpu's) this is a known limitation.
 
It is NexentaStor 4.0.4 , the current one.
I've turned off ACPI , just for testing purposes ( It was slow before anyway ).
I will try your config as soon as I get home from work :)

Thanks for your time for now :)
 
I dont know much about nexenta, but I do know that ZFS usually requires a lot of RAM to work well. I would allocate at least 8GB towards it, plus another 1GB for each TB of space.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom