惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

S
SegmentFault 最新的问题
爱范儿
爱范儿
博客园 - Franky
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
WordPress大学
WordPress大学
宝玉的分享
宝玉的分享
雷峰网
雷峰网
酷 壳 – CoolShell
酷 壳 – CoolShell
IT之家
IT之家
有赞技术团队
有赞技术团队
美团技术团队
Last Week in AI
Last Week in AI
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
大猫的无限游戏
大猫的无限游戏
The Cloudflare Blog
Jina AI
Jina AI
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
Engineering at Meta
Engineering at Meta
T
Tailwind CSS Blog
J
Java Code Geeks
Martin Fowler
Martin Fowler
I
InfoQ
小众软件
小众软件
MongoDB | Blog
MongoDB | Blog

Datadog | The Monitor blog

Introducing our open source AI-native SAST Instrument and monitor Boomi integration flows with OpenTelemetry and Datadog Not all index scans are equal: How we cut query latency by over 99% Platform engineering metrics: What to measure and what to ignore Integrate Recorded Future threat intelligence with Datadog Cloud SIEM CI/CD security: threat modeling using a MITRE-style threat matrix CI/CD security: How to secure your GitHub ecosystem Ingress NGINX is EOL: A practical guide for migrating to Kubernetes Gateway API Operating agentic AI with Amazon Bedrock AgentCore and Datadog LLM Observability: Lessons from NTT DATA Introducing the Datadog Code Security MCP Capture and analyze custom heatmaps in Session Replay Understand session replays faster with AI summaries and smart chapters Monitor ClickHouse query performance with Datadog Database Monitoring How we designed empathetic alert sounds for on-call engineers Search and act across Datadog to resolve issues faster with Bits Assistant Measure the business impact of every product change with Datadog Experiments Analyzing round trip query latency Configuring JavaScript caches for better performance Introducing Bits AI Dev Agent for Code Security Datadog achieves ISO 42001 certification for responsible AI Monitor Nutanix clusters, hosts, and VMs with Datadog Monitor Juniper Mist in Datadog A new Host Map for modern infrastructure Annotate traces to improve LLM quality with Datadog LLM Observability What’s new in Cloud SIEM: AI-powered investigations, enhanced threat intelligence, and scalable security operations Explore Kubernetes with native OpenTelemetry data Monitor Oracle Fusion Cloud Applications with Datadog Announcing the Datadog Terraform provider v4.0.0 Scaling Kubernetes workloads on custom metrics How to design cloud environments for AI-powered threat analysis
AWS EBS latency and IOPS: The surprising truth
Alexis Lê-Quôc · 2013-08-06 · via Datadog | The Monitor blog

Performance issues with Amazon Web Services’ Elastic Block Storage (EBS) are complex to understand because EBS is an instance of networked storage. Unlike attached storage, your EBS volumes are sharing some infrastructure with other customers’. So when one of your EBS volumes gets slow, it’s hard to understand why. Actual behavior can sometimes run counter to your intuition.

Are EBS latency and throughput (always) correlated?

Here is an example of latency observed on a standard EBS volume compared to the number of IOPS, a measure of i/o throughput. Each graph represents about 13 hours’ worth of measurements.

  1. The first graph depicts the time it takes in milliseconds for requests to be serviced by the EBS volume, as measured by the operating system of the instance. This is a measure of latency.

  2. The second graph depicts the Volume Queue Length of that same EBS volume, presumably as measured by the hypervisor of the instance. This is a measure of latency.

  3. The third graph depicts the number of IOPS performed on that same EBS volume, again measured by the operating system of the instance. This is a measure of throughput.

aws ebs image
aws ebs image

Notice the relative lack of correlation between IOPS (3rd graph) and the observed service time in ms for the same EBS device (1st graph), highlighted in purple. You would expect to have consistent EBS latency for the same throughput.

Notice also the weak correlation between pending EBS requests (2nd graph) and IOPS (3rd graph), highlighted in red. The interesting pattern happens on the left of the graph, where IOPS stay roughly around 150, while the Volume Queue Length varies widely.

The only strong correlation occurs once the EBS volume is completely saturated. Trying to send 700 IOPS to the standard EBS volume overwhelms it and causes the Volume Queue Length to rise sharply on the right side of the graph.

If IOPS were a great predictor of EBS performance you would expect to have a strong correlation between IOPS and Volume Queue Length, independent of other factors. The 2nd and 3rd graph show this is clearly not the case.

Even if your EC2 instances were using dedicated volumes (known as “provisioned IOPS volumes”? in AWS parlance), the physical disks behind EBS may still be shared with other AWS customers. Their workloads may consume a great share of disk bandwidth when you need it most.

Ultimately, due to AWS’ opacity, there is simply no way to know how much throughput (from the physical disks and from the network that sits in-between) to expect for a given EBS volume. Provisioned IOPS only offer a partial solution to this issue, at a higher hourly cost.

Learn More

For more information on this and other AWS EBS Performance issues, check out our free eBook: The Top 5 Ways to Improve Your AWS EC2 Performance