[SPDK] Re: Query regarding SPDK NVMe-oF TCP performance.

Thank you, Ziye Yang.

Any specific reason for not using io_uring for NVMe-oF TCP? 
Is there any plan to do so in the future? Just to see whether that provides better performance than POSIX socket.

Regards,
Senthil Kumar V.

On 10/03/21, 1:30 PM, "Yang, Ziye" <ziye.yang(a)intel.com> wrote:

    CAUTION: This email originated from outside of Western Digital. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know that the content is safe.


    Hi Senthil,

    This report used the POSIX socket but not the URING socket implementation in SPDK.
    And in the test we use nvme bdev, the uring_bdev (which using the kernel devices) are not included in the test report.




    Best Regards,
    Ziye Yang

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Senthil Kumar Veluswamy <Senthil.Kumar.Veluswamy(a)wdc.com>
    Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2021 3:56 PM
    To: Storage Performance Development Kit <spdk(a)lists.01.org>
    Subject: [SPDK] Query regarding SPDK NVMe-oF TCP performance.

    Hi,
       I’m looking at NVMe-oF TCP performance report for SPDKv20.10 from URL https://ci.spdk.io/download/performance-reports/SPDK_tcp_perf_report_2010.pdf.

    Would like to know whether it was measured by enabling io_uring support at bdev layer?

    As per v19.04 change log, it looks like io_uring was supported from that version onwards.

    io_uring
    A bdev module that issues I/O to kernel block devices using the new io_uring Linux kernel API was added. This module requires liburing.

    Regards,
    Senthil Kumar V.
    _______________________________________________
    SPDK mailing list -- spdk(a)lists.01.org
    To unsubscribe send an email to spdk-leave(a)lists.01.org
    _______________________________________________
    SPDK mailing list -- spdk(a)lists.01.org
    To unsubscribe send an email to spdk-leave(a)lists.01.org