docker network performance in the public cloud

Docker network performance in the public cloud

Arjan Schaaf - Luminis Technologies container.camp London September 11th 2015

Cloud RTI

• Luminis Technologies

• Founded in The Netherlands

• amdatu.com PAAS

• both public and private clouds

• cloud provider independent

Cloud RTI

• CoreOS

• Docker

• Kubernetes

• Load balancing, Data Stores, ELK

• High available, scalable applications with centralised logging, monitoring and metrics

Choose your cloud wisely

• comparing cloud VM’s based on price or hardware specification isn’t enough

• cloud providers throttle their VM’s differently

• don’t trust specifications on ‘paper’

Azure vs AWS

AZURE AWS

INSTANCE TYPE PRICE NETWORK INSTANCE TYPE PRICE NETWORK

A0 $0,018 5 Mbps t2.micro $0,014 Low to Moderate

A1 $0,051 100 Mbps t2.medium $0,056 Low to Moderate

D1 $0,084 unknown m4.large $0,139 Moderate

D2 $0,168 unknown m4.xlarge $0,278 High

A8 $1,97 40Gbit/s InfiniBand m4.10xlarge $2,78 10 Gbit

Native Network Test Setup

• qperf: short running test

• iperf3: longer running test using parallel connections

qperf server container

docker run -dti -p 4000:4000 -p 4001:4001 arjanschaaf/centos-qperf -lp 4000

qperf client container

docker run -ti --rm arjanschaaf/centos-qperf <ip address> -lp 4000 -ip 4001 tcp_bw tcp_lat

iperf3 server container

docker run -dti -p 5201:5201 arjanschaaf/centos-iperf3--server

iperf3 client container

docker run -ti --rm arjanschaaf/centos-iperf3 -c <ip address> -t 300 -P 128

Native Network Test Results Bandwidth

0

350

700

1050

1400

A0 A1 D1 D2 A8 t2.micro t2.medium m4.large m4.xlarge m4.10xlarge

qperf iperf3

Native Network Test Results Bandwidth

0

125

250

375

500

A0 A1 D1 D2 A8 t2.micro t2.medium m4.large m4.xlarge

qperf iperf3

Native Network Test Results qperf latency

0

125

250

375

500

A0 A1 D1 D2 A8 t2.micro t2.medium m4.large m4.xlarge m4.10xlarge

Docker Networking

• Connect containers over the host interface (use ambassadors!)

• Use a SDN to connect your Docker cluster nodes

• weave

• flannel

• Project Calico

Before Docker 1.7

• Approach depended on the SDN

• replace the docker bridge

• proxy in front on docker daemon

Docker libnetwork

• Announced along with Docker 1.7 as an experimental feature

• Networking Plugins: batteries included but swappable

• Included batteries are based on Socketplane

• Other plugins announced by: Weave, Project Calico, Cisco, VMware and others

Choose your SDN wisely

• Functional features like encryption & DNS

• Support for libnetwork, kubernetes etc etc

• Implementations can be fundamentally different

• overlay networks like Flannel & Weave

• different overlay backend implementations (for example UDP)

• L2/L3 based networks like Project Calico

Flannel

• Created by CoreOS

• Easy to setup

• Different backends

• UDP

• VXLAN

• AWS VPC (uses VPC routing table)

• GCE (uses Network routing table)

Weave

• Used Weave 1.0.3, 1.1 released this week

• DNS

• Proxy based approach

• Different backends

• pcap (default)

• VXLAN (fast-datapath-preview)

Project Calico

• Uses vRouters connected over BGP routes

• No additional overlay when running on a L2 or L3 network (think datacentre!)

• Won’t run on public clouds like AWS without a IPIP tunnel

• Extensive and simple network policies (tenant isolation!)

• Very promising integration with Kubernetes

Docker Network Test Setup

• exactly the same as the “native” test but this time: use the IP-address or DNS name of the container!

Docker Network Test Results qperf bandwidth

0

350

700

1050

1400

t2.micro t2.medium m4.large m4.xlarge m4.10xlarge

native flannel UDP flannel vxlan weave pcap calico

Docker Network Test Results qperf bandwidth

0

75

150

225

300

t2.micro t2.medium m4.large m4.xlarge


Docker Network Test Results iperf3 bandwidth

0

300

600

900

1200



Docker Network Test Results iperf3 bandwidth

0

25

50

75

100

t2.micro t2.medium m4.large m4.xlarge


Docker Network Test Results qperf latency

0

100

200

300

400



Native vs SDN performance

INSTANCE TYPE FLANNEL UDP FLANNEL VXLAN WEAVE PCAP CALICO

IPERF IPERF IPERF IPERF

T2.MICRO -16% -2% -14% -14%

T2.MEDIUM -1% -1% -3% -3%

M4.LARGE -1% -1% -1% -1%

M4.XLARGE -0% -1% -1% -1%

M4.10XLARGE -55% -20% -79% -32%

Native vs SDN performance & cpu load client + server


IPERF C S IPERF C S IPERF C S IPERF C S

T2.MICRO -16% 62,7% 29% -2% 11,7% 23,2% -14% 59,7% 89,5% -14% 26% 57%

T2.MEDIUM -1% 28,7% 20,2% -1% 20,6% 18,7% -3% 52,6% 33,1% -3% 17% 37%

M4.LARGE -1% 15,4% 12,7% -1% 10% 10% -1% 34,1% 24,8% -1% 21% 21%

M4.XLARGE -0% 9,4% 7,9% -1% 6,6% 7,3% -1% 22,9% 18,9% -1% 12% 10%

M4.10XLARGE -55% 2,8% 5,0% -20% 2,7% 3,4% -79% 14,8% 13,5% -32% 3% 4%

cpu load compared to native test results


C S C S C S C S

T2.MEDIUM 95% 57% 40% 45% 258% 157% 15% 184%

M4.LARGE 108% 46% 35% 15% 361% 185% 177% 140%

M4.XLARGE 92% 44% 35% 33% 367% 244% 141% 82%

Conclusion

• Happy with choice for Flannel VXLAN

• Interested in Project Calico in combination with Kubernetes

Conclusion

• synthetic tests are a great starting point

• don’t forget to validate the results with “real life” load tests on your application(s)

Links

• http://weave.works

• http://blog.weave.works/2015/06/12/weave-fast-datapath

• http://coreos.com/flannel

• http://www.projectcalico.org

• http://linux.die.net/man/1/qperf

• http://github.com/esnet/iperf

@arjanschaaf

arjanschaaf.github.io

www.luminis.eu

docker network performance in the public cloud

Internet