|2.2.3||Jun 28, 2022|
|2.2.2||May 26, 2022|
|2.1.2||Sep 10, 2021|
|2.1.1||Aug 24, 2021|
|2.0.0||Jun 24, 2021|
#23 in Profiling
39 downloads per month
Resource Control Benchmarks
Resource control aims to control compute resource distribution to improve
reliability and utilization of a system.
resctl-bench is a collection of
whole-system benchmarks to evaluate resource control and hardware behaviors
using realistic simulated workloads.
Comprehensive resource control involves the whole system - kernel subsystems such as cgroup2, memory management, file system and block layer, userspace system components and even the SSD. Furthermore, testing resource control end-to-end requires scenarios involving realistic workloads and monitoring their interactions. The combination makes benchmarking resource control challenging and error-prone. It's easy to slip up on a configuration and testing with real workloads can be tedious and unreliable.
resctl-bench encapsulates the whole process so that resource control
benchmarks can be performed easily and reliably. It verifies and updates
system configurations, reproduces resource contention scenarios with a
realistic latency-sensitive workload simulator and other secondary
workloads, analyzes the resulting system and workload behaviors, and
generates easily understandable reports.
resctl-bench is a part of
resctl-demo suite, which gives a guided tour
of various resource control strategies using live scenarios built on the
same components. The benchmarks implemented in
concepts and components which are documented in
resctl-demo in depth. For
more information on
Premade System Images
Comprehensive resource control has many requirements, some of which can be
difficult to configure on an existing system.
resctl-demo provides premade
images to help getting started. Visit the following page for details:
For other installation options, visit:
An Example Session
Let's say we want to see how well iocost can protect
rd-hashd and designed
a bench sequence like the following:
hashd-paramsto determine hashd parameters.
protectionwith iocost disabled to establish the baseline.
iocost-paramsto determine the iocost parameters.
protectionwith iocost enabled and compare the results.
Assuming the root device is
nvme0n1 with the device number
$ echo '259:0 enable=0' > /sys/fs/cgroup/io.cost.qos $ echo 0 > /sys/block/nvme0n1/queue/wbt_lat_usec $ resctl-bench -r result.json run \ hashd-params:passive=io \ protection:id=iocost-off,passive=io \ iocost-params \ protection:id=iocost-on
- We want to run the first two benchmarks with iocost off. Turn it off
manually and tell the first two to not touch IO related configurations.
wbtis turned off too to stay consistent with
- To reduce confusion, we're marking the two
protectionruns with different IDs.
Here are the example outputs:
- Summary: https://github.com/facebookexperimental/resctl-demo/blob/main/resctl-bench/examples/prot-iocost-off-on-summary.txt
- Format: https://github.com/facebookexperimental/resctl-demo/blob/main/resctl-bench/examples/prot-iocost-off-on-format.txt
Let's look at the result of the first benchmark -
[hashd-params result] 2021-06-22 17:23:03 - 17:43:47 System info: kernel="5.6.13-0_fbk16_5756_gdcbe47195163" nr_cpus=36 memory=63.9G swap=32.0G swappiness=60 zswap mem_profile=16 (avail=57.4G share=12.0G target=11.0G) passive=io IO info: dev=nvme0n1(259:0) model="WDC CL SN720 SDAQNTW-512G-1020" size=477G iosched=none wbt=off iocost=off other=off Params: log_bps=1.0M Result: hash_size=1.2M rps_max=1029 mem_actual=16.1G chunk_pages=25
After the header, the following three blocks are showing the system and bench configurations followed by the result.
passive=io, so IO configurations were left as-are. We can see that
otherIO controllers were off.
zswapis reported on. I forgot to turn it off. The subsequent benchmarks will automatically turn off
zswapas they are storage focused benchmarks. It'd have been better if
zswapwere off here too but it shouldn't make much difference given that all data are incompressible and the primary goal of this bench is establishing the common measuring standard.
- The determined memory footprint is 16.1G, which is pretty good given that
the amount of memory available to the benchmark -
mem_target- was only 11G.
Let's now take a look at the first next result. Partial header:
[protection result] "iocost-off" 2021-06-22 19:13:37 - 19:30:25 ... IO info: dev=nvme0n1(259:0) model="WDC CL SN720 SDAQNTW-512G-1020" size=477G iosched=none wbt=off iocost=off other=off
shows that this is
protection result with ID
iocost-off. Skipping over
to the result:
Memory Hog Summary ================== IO Latency: R p50=885u:3.7m/49.5m p90=4.7m:12.7m/150m p99=13.1m:25.1m/350m max=30.4m:65.4m/750m W p50=5.0m:16.3m/99.5m p90=17.6m:28.3m/250m p99=29.0m:38.8m/450m max=48.9m:87.0m/850m Isolation and Request Latency Impact Distributions: min p01 p05 p10 p25 p50 p75 p90 p95 p99 max mean stdev isol% 0 0.49 1.65 2.24 13.12 50.90 72.52 82.12 88.56 100.0 100.0 45.50 30.72 lat-imp% 0 0 0 0 4.69 17.00 40.54 75.06 121.9 380.3 882.5 39.42 81.53 Result: isol=45.50:30.72% lat_imp=39.42%:81.53 work_csv=100.0% missing=0.26%
For brevity, let's just focus on the
isol=45.50:30.72% on the last line,
which is indicating that the isolation factor - how well the RPS of the
rd-hashd could be protected against interferences from memory hogs -
averaged 45.5% with the standard deviation of 30.72%. Roughly speaking, our
main workload's RPS halved while the system was experiencing memory
shortage. For more information on the output format:
$ resctl-bench doc protection
So, we now know that without
iocost, the protection isn't great. The next
iocost-params benchmark determines the parameters so that we can enable
it. The result:
iocost model: rbps=1348822120 rseqiops=235687 rrandiops=218614 wbps=601694170 wseqiops=133453 wrandiops=69308 iocost QoS: rpct=95.00 rlat=19562 wpct=95.00 wlat=65667 min=60.00 max=100.00
iocost-params automatically applies the determined parameters for the
subsequent benchmarks. The QoS parameters determined here are very naive but
should do for our purpose. For determining more accurate QoS parameters and
evaluating storage devices comprehensively, see the
Let's see whether the
protection result is any better with
[protection result] "iocost-on" 2021-06-22 19:38:53 - 20:02:27 ... IO info: dev=nvme0n1(259:0) model="WDC CL SN720 SDAQNTW-512G-1020" size=477G iosched=none wbt=off iocost=on other=off iocost model: rbps=1348822120 rseqiops=235687 rrandiops=218614 wbps=601694170 wseqiops=133453 wrandiops=69308 iocost QoS: rpct=95.00 rlat=19562 wpct=95.00 wlat=65667 min=60.00 max=100.00
The header confirms that we are testing the correct configuration. The result:
Memory Hog Summary ================== IO Latency: R p50=164u:42.2u/415u p90=915u:827u/17.5m p99=3.4m:4.5m/97.5m max=8.8m:10.3m/250m W p50=158u:1.7m/41.5m p90=2.3m:9.1m/95.5m p99=5.1m:14.3m/97.5m max=8.8m:21.7m/350m Isolation and Request Latency Impact Distributions: min p01 p05 p10 p25 p50 p75 p90 p95 p99 max mean stdev isol% 0 0 88.34 90.57 93.78 97.30 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 95.18 11.06 lat-imp% 0 0 0.96 2.20 3.79 6.49 10.22 15.63 18.32 29.55 263.0 8.14 9.99 Result: isol=95.18:11.06% lat_imp=8.14%:9.99 work_csv=42.89% missing=0.21%
The isolation factor average is now 95.18% with the standard deviation of
11.06%, a significant improvement over 45.5% without
This example shows that testing resource control behaviors using scenarios
that exercise every layer of the tall stack realistically is easy and
resctl-bench. For more information, explore the doc pages:
$ resctl-bench doc --help