CadolesKube
/
typhoon
mirror of https://github.com/puppetmaster/typhoon.git
7
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
typhoon/docs/topics/performance.md

47 lines
2.6 KiB
Markdown
Raw Normal View History

Add docs on provision time and network performance
2017-10-04 08:44:26 +02:00
# Performance
## Provision Time
Provisioning times vary based on the platform. Sampling the time to create (apply) and destroy clusters with 1 controller and 2 workers shows (roughly) what to expect.
| Platform | Apply | Destroy |
|---------------|-------|---------|
| AWS | 20 min | 8 min 10 sec |
| Bare-Metal | 10-14 min | NA |
digital-ocean: Run etcd cluster on-host, across controllers * Run etcd peers with TLS across controller nodes * Deprecate self-hosted-etcd on the Digital Ocean platform * Distribute etcd TLS certificates as part of initial provisioning * Check the status of etcd by running `systemctl status etcd-member`
2017-10-04 09:07:48 +02:00
| Digital Ocean | 3 min 30 sec | 20 sec |
Add docs on provision time and network performance
2017-10-04 08:44:26 +02:00
| Google Cloud | 6 min 10 sec | 4 min 30 sec |
Notes:
* AWS is alpha
* DNS propagation times have a large impact on provision time
* Platforms with auto-scaling take more time to provision (AWS, Google)
* Bare-metal provision times vary depending on the time for machines to POST and network bandwidth to download images.
## Network Performance
Network performance varies based on the platform and CNI plugin. `iperf` was used to measture the bandwidth between different hosts and different pods. Host-to-host indicates the typical bandwidth offered by the provider. Pod-to-pod shows the bandwidth between two `iperf` containers. The difference provides some idea about the overhead.
| Platform / Plugin | Theory | Host to Host | Pod to Pod |
|----------------------------|-------:|-------------:|-------------:|
| AWS (flannel) | ? | 976 MB/s | 900-999 MB/s |
| AWS (calico, MTU 1480) | ? | 976 MB/s | 100-350 MB/s |
| AWS (calico, MTU 8991) | ? | 976 MB/s | 900-999 MB/s |
| Bare-Metal (flannel) | 1 GB/s | 934 MB/s | 903 MB/s |
| Bare-Metal (calico) | 1 GB/s | 941 MB/s | 931 MB/s |
Add performance benchmark for flannel with bonded NICs
2017-10-16 10:12:13 +02:00
| Bare-Metal (flannel, bond) | 3 GB/s | 2.3 GB/s | 1.17 GB/s |
Add docs on provision time and network performance
2017-10-04 08:44:26 +02:00
| Bare-Metal (calico, bond) | 3 GB/s | 2.3 GB/s | 1.17 GB/s |
| Digital Ocean | ? | 938 MB/s | 820-880 MB/s |
| Google Cloud (flannel) | ? | 1.94 GB/s | 1.76 GB/s |
| Google Cloud (calico) | ? | 1.94 GB/s | 1.81 GB/s |
Notes:
* AWS is alpha
* AWS instances are located in the same region. Google instances are located in the same zone (helps bandwidth at the expense of fault tolerance).
* Network bandwidth fluctuates on AWS and Digital Ocean.
* Only [certain AWS EC2 instance types](http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/network_mtu.html#jumbo_frame_instances) allow jumbo frames. This is why the default MTU on AWS must be 1480.
* Between Flannel and Calico, performance differences are usually minimal. Platform and configuration differenes dominate.
* Pods do not seem to be able to leverage the hosts' bonded NIC setup. Possibly a testing artifact.
Add performance benchmark for flannel with bonded NICs
2017-10-16 10:12:13 +02:00
* Observing the same bonded NIC pod-to-pod limit suggests the bottleneck lies below flannel and calico.