thr3ads.net - Gluster users - [Gluster-users] Run away memory with gluster mount [Jan 2018]

If this information is useful, please help other people find it:
Share via:

Dan Ragle

2018-Jan-29 15:32 UTC

[Gluster-users] Run away memory with gluster mount

On 1/29/2018 2:36 AM, Raghavendra Gowdappa wrote:> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Ravishankar N" <ravishankar at redhat.com>
>> To: "Dan Ragle" <daniel at Biblestuph.com>,
gluster-users at gluster.org
>> Cc: "Csaba Henk" <chenk at redhat.com>, "Niels de
Vos" <ndevos at redhat.com>, "Nithya Balachandran"
<nbalacha at redhat.com>,
>> "Raghavendra Gowdappa" <rgowdapp at redhat.com>
>> Sent: Saturday, January 27, 2018 10:23:38 AM
>> Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] Run away memory with gluster mount
>>
>>
>>
>> On 01/27/2018 02:29 AM, Dan Ragle wrote:
>>>
>>> On 1/25/2018 8:21 PM, Ravishankar N wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 01/25/2018 11:04 PM, Dan Ragle wrote:
>>>>> *sigh* trying again to correct formatting ... apologize for
the
>>>>> earlier mess.
>>>>>
>>>>> Having a memory issue with Gluster 3.12.4 and not sure how
to
>>>>> troubleshoot. I don't *think* this is expected
behavior.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is on an updated CentOS 7 box. The setup is a simple
two node
>>>>> replicated layout where the two nodes act as both server
and
>>>>> client.
>>>>>
>>>>> The volume in question:
>>>>>
>>>>> Volume Name: GlusterWWW
>>>>> Type: Replicate
>>>>> Volume ID: 8e9b0e79-f309-4d9b-a5bb-45d065faaaa3
>>>>> Status: Started
>>>>> Snapshot Count: 0
>>>>> Number of Bricks: 1 x 2 = 2
>>>>> Transport-type: tcp
>>>>> Bricks:
>>>>> Brick1: vs1dlan.mydomain.com:/glusterfs_bricks/brick1/www
>>>>> Brick2: vs2dlan.mydomain.com:/glusterfs_bricks/brick1/www
>>>>> Options Reconfigured:
>>>>> nfs.disable: on
>>>>> cluster.favorite-child-policy: mtime
>>>>> transport.address-family: inet
>>>>>
>>>>> I had some other performance options in there, (increased
>>>>> cache-size, md invalidation, etc) but stripped them out in
an
>>>>> attempt to
>>>>> isolate the issue. Still got the problem without them.
>>>>>
>>>>> The volume currently contains over 1M files.
>>>>>
>>>>> When mounting the volume, I get (among other things) a
process as such:
>>>>>
>>>>> /usr/sbin/glusterfs --volfile-server=localhost
>>>>> --volfile-id=/GlusterWWW /var/www
>>>>>
>>>>> This process begins with little memory, but then as files
are
>>>>> accessed in the volume the memory increases. I setup a
script that
>>>>> simply reads the files in the volume one at a time (no
writes). It's
>>>>> been running on and off about 12 hours now and the resident
>>>>> memory of the above process is already at 7.5G and
continues to grow
>>>>> slowly. If I stop the test script the memory stops growing,
>>>>> but does not reduce. Restart the test script and the memory
begins
>>>>> slowly growing again.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is obviously a contrived app environment. With my
intended
>>>>> application load it takes about a week or so for the memory
to get
>>>>> high enough to invoke the oom killer.
>>>>
>>>> Can you try debugging with the statedump
>>>>
(https://gluster.readthedocs.io/en/latest/Troubleshooting/statedump/#read-a-statedump)
>>>> of
>>>> the fuse mount process and see what member is leaking? Take the
>>>> statedumps in succession, maybe once initially during the I/O
and
>>>> once the memory gets high enough to hit the OOM mark.
>>>> Share the dumps here.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Ravi
>>>
>>> Thanks for the reply. I noticed yesterday that an update (3.12.5)
had
>>> been posted so I went ahead and updated and repeated the test
>>> overnight. The memory usage does not appear to be growing as
quickly
>>> as is was with 3.12.4, but does still appear to be growing.
>>>
>>> I should also mention that there is another process beyond my test
app
>>> that is reading the files from the volume. Specifically, there is
an
>>> rsync that runs from the second node 2-4 times an hour that reads
from
>>> the GlusterWWW volume mounted on node 1. Since none of the files in
>>> that mount are changing it doesn't actually rsync anything, but
>>> nonetheless it is running and reading the files in addition to my
test
>>> script. (It's a part of my intended production setup that I
forgot was
>>> still running.)
>>>
>>> The mount process appears to be gaining memory at a rate of about
1GB
>>> every 4 hours or so. At that rate it'll take several days
before it
>>> runs the box out of memory. But I took your suggestion and made
some
>>> statedumps today anyway, about 2 hours apart, 4 total so far. It
looks
>>> like there may already be some actionable information. These are
the
>>> only registers where the num_allocs have grown with each of the
four
>>> samples:
>>>
>>> [mount/fuse.fuse - usage-type gf_fuse_mt_gids_t memusage]
>>>  ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 08:57:31 2018: 784
>>>  ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 10:55:50 2018: 831
>>>  ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 12:55:15 2018: 877
>>>  ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 14:58:27 2018: 908
>>>
>>> [mount/fuse.fuse - usage-type gf_common_mt_fd_lk_ctx_t memusage]
>>>  ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 08:57:31 2018: 5
>>>  ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 10:55:50 2018: 10
>>>  ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 12:55:15 2018: 15
>>>  ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 14:58:27 2018: 17
>>>
>>> [cluster/distribute.GlusterWWW-dht - usage-type
gf_dht_mt_dht_layout_t
>>> memusage]
>>>  ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 08:57:31 2018: 24243596
>>>  ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 10:55:50 2018: 27902622
>>>  ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 12:55:15 2018: 30678066
>>>  ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 14:58:27 2018: 33801036
>>>
>>> Not sure the best way to get you the full dumps. They're pretty
big,
>>> over 1G for all four. Also, I noticed some filepath information in
>>> there that I'd rather not share. What's the recommended
next step?
> 
> Please run the following query on statedump files and report us the
results:
> # grep itable <client-statedump> | grep active | wc -l
> # grep itable <client-statedump> | grep active_size
> # grep itable <client-statedump> | grep lru | wc -l
> # grep itable <client-statedump> | grep lru_size
> # grep itable <client-statedump> | grep purge | wc -l
> # grep itable <client-statedump> | grep purge_size
Had to restart the test and have been running for 36 hours now. RSS is 
currently up to 23g.

Working on getting a bug report with link to the dumps. In the mean 
time, I'm including the results of your above queries for the first 
dump, the 18 hour dump, and the 36 hour dump:

# grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517104561 | grep active | wc -l
53865
# grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517169361 | grep active | wc -l
53864
# grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517234161 | grep active | wc -l
53864

# grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517104561 | grep active_size
xlator.mount.fuse.itable.active_size=53864
# grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517169361 | grep active_size
xlator.mount.fuse.itable.active_size=53863
# grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517234161 | grep active_size
xlator.mount.fuse.itable.active_size=53863

# grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517104561 | grep lru | wc -l
998510
# grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517169361 | grep lru | wc -l
998510
# grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517234161 | grep lru | wc -l
995992

# grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517104561 | grep lru_size
xlator.mount.fuse.itable.lru_size=998508
# grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517169361 | grep lru_size
xlator.mount.fuse.itable.lru_size=998508
# grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517234161 | grep lru_size
xlator.mount.fuse.itable.lru_size=995990

# grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517104561 | grep purge | wc -l
1
# grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517169361 | grep purge | wc -l
1
# grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517234161 | grep purge | wc -l
1

# grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517104561 | grep purge_size
xlator.mount.fuse.itable.purge_size=0
# grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517169361 | grep purge_size
xlator.mount.fuse.itable.purge_size=0
# grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517234161 | grep purge_size
xlator.mount.fuse.itable.purge_size=0

Cheers,

Dan
> 
>>
>> I've CC'd the fuse/ dht devs to see if these data types have
potential
>> leaks. Could you raise a bug with the volume info and a (dropbox?) link
>> from which we can download the dumps? You can remove/replace the
>> filepaths from them.
>>
>> Regards.
>> Ravi
>>
>>>
>>> Cheers!
>>>
>>> Dan
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there potentially something misconfigured here?
>>>>>
>>>>> I did see a reference to a memory leak in another thread in
this
>>>>> list, but that had to do with the setting of quotas, I
don't have
>>>>> any quotas set on my system.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Dan Ragle
>>>>> daniel at Biblestuph.com
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1/25/2018 11:04 AM, Dan Ragle wrote:
>>>>>> Having a memory issue with Gluster 3.12.4 and not sure
how to
>>>>>> troubleshoot. I don't *think* this is expected
behavior. This is on an
>>>>>> updated CentOS 7 box. The setup is a simple two node
replicated layout
>>>>>> where the two nodes act as both server and client. The
volume in
>>>>>> question: Volume Name: GlusterWWW Type: Replicate
Volume ID:
>>>>>> 8e9b0e79-f309-4d9b-a5bb-45d065faaaa3 Status: Started
Snapshot Count: 0
>>>>>> Number of Bricks: 1 x 2 = 2 Transport-type: tcp Bricks:
Brick1:
>>>>>> vs1dlan.mydomain.com:/glusterfs_bricks/brick1/www
Brick2:
>>>>>> vs2dlan.mydomain.com:/glusterfs_bricks/brick1/www
Options
>>>>>> Reconfigured:
>>>>>> nfs.disable: on cluster.favorite-child-policy: mtime
>>>>>> transport.address-family: inet I had some other
performance options in
>>>>>> there, (increased cache-size, md invalidation, etc) but
stripped them
>>>>>> out in an attempt to isolate the issue. Still got the
problem without
>>>>>> them. The volume currently contains over 1M files. When
mounting the
>>>>>> volume, I get (among other things) a process as such:
>>>>>> /usr/sbin/glusterfs --volfile-server=localhost
>>>>>> --volfile-id=/GlusterWWW
>>>>>> /var/www This process begins with little memory, but
then as files are
>>>>>> accessed in the volume the memory increases. I setup a
script that
>>>>>> simply reads the files in the volume one at a time (no
writes). It's
>>>>>> been running on and off about 12 hours now and the
resident memory of
>>>>>> the above process is already at 7.5G and continues to
grow slowly.
>>>>>> If I
>>>>>> stop the test script the memory stops growing, but does
not reduce.
>>>>>> Restart the test script and the memory begins slowly
growing again.
>>>>>> This
>>>>>> is obviously a contrived app environment. With my
intended application
>>>>>> load it takes about a week or so for the memory to get
high enough to
>>>>>> invoke the oom killer. Is there potentially something
misconfigured
>>>>>> here? Thanks, Dan Ragle daniel at Biblestuph.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Gluster-users mailing list
>>>>>> Gluster-users at gluster.org
>>>>>> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Gluster-users mailing list
>>>>> Gluster-users at gluster.org
>>>>> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Gluster-users mailing list
>>> Gluster-users at gluster.org
>>> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>
>>
>

Raghavendra Gowdappa

2018-Jan-30 11:31 UTC

head link

[Gluster-users] Run away memory with gluster mount

----- Original Message -----> From: "Dan Ragle" <daniel at Biblestuph.com>
> To: "Raghavendra Gowdappa" <rgowdapp at redhat.com>,
"Ravishankar N" <ravishankar at redhat.com>
> Cc: gluster-users at gluster.org, "Csaba Henk" <chenk at
redhat.com>, "Niels de Vos" <ndevos at redhat.com>,
"Nithya
> Balachandran" <nbalacha at redhat.com>
> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2018 9:02:21 PM
> Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] Run away memory with gluster mount
> 
> 
> 
> On 1/29/2018 2:36 AM, Raghavendra Gowdappa wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Ravishankar N" <ravishankar at redhat.com>
> >> To: "Dan Ragle" <daniel at Biblestuph.com>,
gluster-users at gluster.org
> >> Cc: "Csaba Henk" <chenk at redhat.com>,
"Niels de Vos" <ndevos at redhat.com>,
> >> "Nithya Balachandran" <nbalacha at redhat.com>,
> >> "Raghavendra Gowdappa" <rgowdapp at redhat.com>
> >> Sent: Saturday, January 27, 2018 10:23:38 AM
> >> Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] Run away memory with gluster mount
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 01/27/2018 02:29 AM, Dan Ragle wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 1/25/2018 8:21 PM, Ravishankar N wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 01/25/2018 11:04 PM, Dan Ragle wrote:
> >>>>> *sigh* trying again to correct formatting ...
apologize for the
> >>>>> earlier mess.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Having a memory issue with Gluster 3.12.4 and not sure
how to
> >>>>> troubleshoot. I don't *think* this is expected
behavior.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This is on an updated CentOS 7 box. The setup is a
simple two node
> >>>>> replicated layout where the two nodes act as both
server and
> >>>>> client.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The volume in question:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Volume Name: GlusterWWW
> >>>>> Type: Replicate
> >>>>> Volume ID: 8e9b0e79-f309-4d9b-a5bb-45d065faaaa3
> >>>>> Status: Started
> >>>>> Snapshot Count: 0
> >>>>> Number of Bricks: 1 x 2 = 2
> >>>>> Transport-type: tcp
> >>>>> Bricks:
> >>>>> Brick1:
vs1dlan.mydomain.com:/glusterfs_bricks/brick1/www
> >>>>> Brick2:
vs2dlan.mydomain.com:/glusterfs_bricks/brick1/www
> >>>>> Options Reconfigured:
> >>>>> nfs.disable: on
> >>>>> cluster.favorite-child-policy: mtime
> >>>>> transport.address-family: inet
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I had some other performance options in there,
(increased
> >>>>> cache-size, md invalidation, etc) but stripped them
out in an
> >>>>> attempt to
> >>>>> isolate the issue. Still got the problem without them.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The volume currently contains over 1M files.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> When mounting the volume, I get (among other things) a
process as such:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> /usr/sbin/glusterfs --volfile-server=localhost
> >>>>> --volfile-id=/GlusterWWW /var/www
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This process begins with little memory, but then as
files are
> >>>>> accessed in the volume the memory increases. I setup a
script that
> >>>>> simply reads the files in the volume one at a time (no
writes). It's
> >>>>> been running on and off about 12 hours now and the
resident
> >>>>> memory of the above process is already at 7.5G and
continues to grow
> >>>>> slowly. If I stop the test script the memory stops
growing,
> >>>>> but does not reduce. Restart the test script and the
memory begins
> >>>>> slowly growing again.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This is obviously a contrived app environment. With my
intended
> >>>>> application load it takes about a week or so for the
memory to get
> >>>>> high enough to invoke the oom killer.
> >>>>
> >>>> Can you try debugging with the statedump
> >>>>
(https://gluster.readthedocs.io/en/latest/Troubleshooting/statedump/#read-a-statedump)
> >>>> of
> >>>> the fuse mount process and see what member is leaking?
Take the
> >>>> statedumps in succession, maybe once initially during the
I/O and
> >>>> once the memory gets high enough to hit the OOM mark.
> >>>> Share the dumps here.
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>> Ravi
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for the reply. I noticed yesterday that an update
(3.12.5) had
> >>> been posted so I went ahead and updated and repeated the test
> >>> overnight. The memory usage does not appear to be growing as
quickly
> >>> as is was with 3.12.4, but does still appear to be growing.
> >>>
> >>> I should also mention that there is another process beyond my
test app
> >>> that is reading the files from the volume. Specifically, there
is an
> >>> rsync that runs from the second node 2-4 times an hour that
reads from
> >>> the GlusterWWW volume mounted on node 1. Since none of the
files in
> >>> that mount are changing it doesn't actually rsync
anything, but
> >>> nonetheless it is running and reading the files in addition to
my test
> >>> script. (It's a part of my intended production setup that
I forgot was
> >>> still running.)
> >>>
> >>> The mount process appears to be gaining memory at a rate of
about 1GB
> >>> every 4 hours or so. At that rate it'll take several days
before it
> >>> runs the box out of memory. But I took your suggestion and
made some
> >>> statedumps today anyway, about 2 hours apart, 4 total so far.
It looks
> >>> like there may already be some actionable information. These
are the
> >>> only registers where the num_allocs have grown with each of
the four
> >>> samples:
> >>>
> >>> [mount/fuse.fuse - usage-type gf_fuse_mt_gids_t memusage]
> >>>  ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 08:57:31 2018: 784
> >>>  ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 10:55:50 2018: 831
> >>>  ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 12:55:15 2018: 877
> >>>  ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 14:58:27 2018: 908
> >>>
> >>> [mount/fuse.fuse - usage-type gf_common_mt_fd_lk_ctx_t
memusage]
> >>>  ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 08:57:31 2018: 5
> >>>  ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 10:55:50 2018: 10
> >>>  ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 12:55:15 2018: 15
> >>>  ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 14:58:27 2018: 17
> >>>
> >>> [cluster/distribute.GlusterWWW-dht - usage-type
gf_dht_mt_dht_layout_t
> >>> memusage]
> >>>  ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 08:57:31 2018: 24243596
> >>>  ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 10:55:50 2018: 27902622
> >>>  ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 12:55:15 2018: 30678066
> >>>  ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 14:58:27 2018: 33801036
> >>>
> >>> Not sure the best way to get you the full dumps. They're
pretty big,
> >>> over 1G for all four. Also, I noticed some filepath
information in
> >>> there that I'd rather not share. What's the
recommended next step?
> > 
> > Please run the following query on statedump files and report us the
> > results:
> > # grep itable <client-statedump> | grep active | wc -l
> > # grep itable <client-statedump> | grep active_size
> > # grep itable <client-statedump> | grep lru | wc -l
> > # grep itable <client-statedump> | grep lru_size
> > # grep itable <client-statedump> | grep purge | wc -l
> > # grep itable <client-statedump> | grep purge_size
> 
> Had to restart the test and have been running for 36 hours now. RSS is
> currently up to 23g.
> 
> Working on getting a bug report with link to the dumps. In the mean
> time, I'm including the results of your above queries for the first
> dump, the 18 hour dump, and the 36 hour dump:
> 
> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517104561 | grep active | wc -l
> 53865
> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517169361 | grep active | wc -l
> 53864
> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517234161 | grep active | wc -l
> 53864
> 
> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517104561 | grep active_size
> xlator.mount.fuse.itable.active_size=53864
> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517169361 | grep active_size
> xlator.mount.fuse.itable.active_size=53863
> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517234161 | grep active_size
> xlator.mount.fuse.itable.active_size=53863
> 
> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517104561 | grep lru | wc -l
> 998510
> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517169361 | grep lru | wc -l
> 998510
> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517234161 | grep lru | wc -l
> 995992
> 
> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517104561 | grep lru_size
> xlator.mount.fuse.itable.lru_size=998508
> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517169361 | grep lru_size
> xlator.mount.fuse.itable.lru_size=998508
> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517234161 | grep lru_size
> xlator.mount.fuse.itable.lru_size=995990
Around 1 million of inodes in lru table!! These are the inodes kernel has just
cached and no operation is currently progress on these inodes. This could be the
reason for high memory usage. We've a patch being worked on (merged on
experimental branch currently) [1], that will help in these sceanrios. In the
meantime can you remount glusterfs with options --entry-timeout=0 and
--attribute-timeout=0? This will make sure that kernel won't cache
inodes/attributes of the file and should bring down the memory usage.

I am curious to know what is your data-set like? Is it the case of too many
directories and files present in deep directories? I am wondering whether a
significant number of inodes cached by kernel are there to hold dentry structure
in kernel.

[1] https://review.gluster.org/#/c/18665/
> 
> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517104561 | grep purge | wc -l
> 1
> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517169361 | grep purge | wc -l
> 1
> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517234161 | grep purge | wc -l
> 1
> 
> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517104561 | grep purge_size
> xlator.mount.fuse.itable.purge_size=0
> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517169361 | grep purge_size
> xlator.mount.fuse.itable.purge_size=0
> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517234161 | grep purge_size
> xlator.mount.fuse.itable.purge_size=0
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Dan
> 
> > 
> >>
> >> I've CC'd the fuse/ dht devs to see if these data types
have potential
> >> leaks. Could you raise a bug with the volume info and a (dropbox?)
link
> >> from which we can download the dumps? You can remove/replace the
> >> filepaths from them.
> >>
> >> Regards.
> >> Ravi
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Cheers!
> >>>
> >>> Dan
> >>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Is there potentially something misconfigured here?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I did see a reference to a memory leak in another
thread in this
> >>>>> list, but that had to do with the setting of quotas, I
don't have
> >>>>> any quotas set on my system.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Dan Ragle
> >>>>> daniel at Biblestuph.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 1/25/2018 11:04 AM, Dan Ragle wrote:
> >>>>>> Having a memory issue with Gluster 3.12.4 and not
sure how to
> >>>>>> troubleshoot. I don't *think* this is expected
behavior. This is on an
> >>>>>> updated CentOS 7 box. The setup is a simple two
node replicated layout
> >>>>>> where the two nodes act as both server and client.
The volume in
> >>>>>> question: Volume Name: GlusterWWW Type: Replicate
Volume ID:
> >>>>>> 8e9b0e79-f309-4d9b-a5bb-45d065faaaa3 Status:
Started Snapshot Count: 0
> >>>>>> Number of Bricks: 1 x 2 = 2 Transport-type: tcp
Bricks: Brick1:
> >>>>>> vs1dlan.mydomain.com:/glusterfs_bricks/brick1/www
Brick2:
> >>>>>> vs2dlan.mydomain.com:/glusterfs_bricks/brick1/www
Options
> >>>>>> Reconfigured:
> >>>>>> nfs.disable: on cluster.favorite-child-policy:
mtime
> >>>>>> transport.address-family: inet I had some other
performance options in
> >>>>>> there, (increased cache-size, md invalidation,
etc) but stripped them
> >>>>>> out in an attempt to isolate the issue. Still got
the problem without
> >>>>>> them. The volume currently contains over 1M files.
When mounting the
> >>>>>> volume, I get (among other things) a process as
such:
> >>>>>> /usr/sbin/glusterfs --volfile-server=localhost
> >>>>>> --volfile-id=/GlusterWWW
> >>>>>> /var/www This process begins with little memory,
but then as files are
> >>>>>> accessed in the volume the memory increases. I
setup a script that
> >>>>>> simply reads the files in the volume one at a time
(no writes). It's
> >>>>>> been running on and off about 12 hours now and the
resident memory of
> >>>>>> the above process is already at 7.5G and continues
to grow slowly.
> >>>>>> If I
> >>>>>> stop the test script the memory stops growing, but
does not reduce.
> >>>>>> Restart the test script and the memory begins
slowly growing again.
> >>>>>> This
> >>>>>> is obviously a contrived app environment. With my
intended application
> >>>>>> load it takes about a week or so for the memory to
get high enough to
> >>>>>> invoke the oom killer. Is there potentially
something misconfigured
> >>>>>> here? Thanks, Dan Ragle daniel at Biblestuph.com
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>> Gluster-users mailing list
> >>>>>> Gluster-users at gluster.org
> >>>>>>
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> Gluster-users mailing list
> >>>>> Gluster-users at gluster.org
> >>>>>
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
> >>>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Gluster-users mailing list
> >>> Gluster-users at gluster.org
> >>> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
> >>
> >>
> > 
>

Dan Ragle

2018-Feb-01 21:27 UTC

head link

[Gluster-users] Run away memory with gluster mount

On 1/30/2018 6:31 AM, Raghavendra Gowdappa wrote:> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Dan Ragle" <daniel at Biblestuph.com>
>> To: "Raghavendra Gowdappa" <rgowdapp at redhat.com>,
"Ravishankar N" <ravishankar at redhat.com>
>> Cc: gluster-users at gluster.org, "Csaba Henk" <chenk at
redhat.com>, "Niels de Vos" <ndevos at redhat.com>,
"Nithya
>> Balachandran" <nbalacha at redhat.com>
>> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2018 9:02:21 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] Run away memory with gluster mount
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1/29/2018 2:36 AM, Raghavendra Gowdappa wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Ravishankar N" <ravishankar at
redhat.com>
>>>> To: "Dan Ragle" <daniel at Biblestuph.com>,
gluster-users at gluster.org
>>>> Cc: "Csaba Henk" <chenk at redhat.com>,
"Niels de Vos" <ndevos at redhat.com>,
>>>> "Nithya Balachandran" <nbalacha at redhat.com>,
>>>> "Raghavendra Gowdappa" <rgowdapp at redhat.com>
>>>> Sent: Saturday, January 27, 2018 10:23:38 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] Run away memory with gluster mount
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 01/27/2018 02:29 AM, Dan Ragle wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1/25/2018 8:21 PM, Ravishankar N wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 01/25/2018 11:04 PM, Dan Ragle wrote:
>>>>>>> *sigh* trying again to correct formatting ...
apologize for the
>>>>>>> earlier mess.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Having a memory issue with Gluster 3.12.4 and not
sure how to
>>>>>>> troubleshoot. I don't *think* this is expected
behavior.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is on an updated CentOS 7 box. The setup is a
simple two node
>>>>>>> replicated layout where the two nodes act as both
server and
>>>>>>> client.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The volume in question:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Volume Name: GlusterWWW
>>>>>>> Type: Replicate
>>>>>>> Volume ID: 8e9b0e79-f309-4d9b-a5bb-45d065faaaa3
>>>>>>> Status: Started
>>>>>>> Snapshot Count: 0
>>>>>>> Number of Bricks: 1 x 2 = 2
>>>>>>> Transport-type: tcp
>>>>>>> Bricks:
>>>>>>> Brick1:
vs1dlan.mydomain.com:/glusterfs_bricks/brick1/www
>>>>>>> Brick2:
vs2dlan.mydomain.com:/glusterfs_bricks/brick1/www
>>>>>>> Options Reconfigured:
>>>>>>> nfs.disable: on
>>>>>>> cluster.favorite-child-policy: mtime
>>>>>>> transport.address-family: inet
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I had some other performance options in there,
(increased
>>>>>>> cache-size, md invalidation, etc) but stripped them
out in an
>>>>>>> attempt to
>>>>>>> isolate the issue. Still got the problem without
them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The volume currently contains over 1M files.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When mounting the volume, I get (among other
things) a process as such:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /usr/sbin/glusterfs --volfile-server=localhost
>>>>>>> --volfile-id=/GlusterWWW /var/www
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This process begins with little memory, but then as
files are
>>>>>>> accessed in the volume the memory increases. I
setup a script that
>>>>>>> simply reads the files in the volume one at a time
(no writes). It's
>>>>>>> been running on and off about 12 hours now and the
resident
>>>>>>> memory of the above process is already at 7.5G and
continues to grow
>>>>>>> slowly. If I stop the test script the memory stops
growing,
>>>>>>> but does not reduce. Restart the test script and
the memory begins
>>>>>>> slowly growing again.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is obviously a contrived app environment. With
my intended
>>>>>>> application load it takes about a week or so for
the memory to get
>>>>>>> high enough to invoke the oom killer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can you try debugging with the statedump
>>>>>>
(https://gluster.readthedocs.io/en/latest/Troubleshooting/statedump/#read-a-statedump)
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> the fuse mount process and see what member is leaking?
Take the
>>>>>> statedumps in succession, maybe once initially during
the I/O and
>>>>>> once the memory gets high enough to hit the OOM mark.
>>>>>> Share the dumps here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Ravi
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the reply. I noticed yesterday that an update
(3.12.5) had
>>>>> been posted so I went ahead and updated and repeated the
test
>>>>> overnight. The memory usage does not appear to be growing
as quickly
>>>>> as is was with 3.12.4, but does still appear to be growing.
>>>>>
>>>>> I should also mention that there is another process beyond
my test app
>>>>> that is reading the files from the volume. Specifically,
there is an
>>>>> rsync that runs from the second node 2-4 times an hour that
reads from
>>>>> the GlusterWWW volume mounted on node 1. Since none of the
files in
>>>>> that mount are changing it doesn't actually rsync
anything, but
>>>>> nonetheless it is running and reading the files in addition
to my test
>>>>> script. (It's a part of my intended production setup
that I forgot was
>>>>> still running.)
>>>>>
>>>>> The mount process appears to be gaining memory at a rate of
about 1GB
>>>>> every 4 hours or so. At that rate it'll take several
days before it
>>>>> runs the box out of memory. But I took your suggestion and
made some
>>>>> statedumps today anyway, about 2 hours apart, 4 total so
far. It looks
>>>>> like there may already be some actionable information.
These are the
>>>>> only registers where the num_allocs have grown with each of
the four
>>>>> samples:
>>>>>
>>>>> [mount/fuse.fuse - usage-type gf_fuse_mt_gids_t memusage]
>>>>>   ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 08:57:31 2018: 784
>>>>>   ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 10:55:50 2018: 831
>>>>>   ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 12:55:15 2018: 877
>>>>>   ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 14:58:27 2018: 908
>>>>>
>>>>> [mount/fuse.fuse - usage-type gf_common_mt_fd_lk_ctx_t
memusage]
>>>>>   ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 08:57:31 2018: 5
>>>>>   ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 10:55:50 2018: 10
>>>>>   ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 12:55:15 2018: 15
>>>>>   ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 14:58:27 2018: 17
>>>>>
>>>>> [cluster/distribute.GlusterWWW-dht - usage-type
gf_dht_mt_dht_layout_t
>>>>> memusage]
>>>>>   ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 08:57:31 2018: 24243596
>>>>>   ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 10:55:50 2018: 27902622
>>>>>   ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 12:55:15 2018: 30678066
>>>>>   ?---> num_allocs at Fri Jan 26 14:58:27 2018: 33801036
>>>>>
>>>>> Not sure the best way to get you the full dumps.
They're pretty big,
>>>>> over 1G for all four. Also, I noticed some filepath
information in
>>>>> there that I'd rather not share. What's the
recommended next step?
>>>
>>> Please run the following query on statedump files and report us the
>>> results:
>>> # grep itable <client-statedump> | grep active | wc -l
>>> # grep itable <client-statedump> | grep active_size
>>> # grep itable <client-statedump> | grep lru | wc -l
>>> # grep itable <client-statedump> | grep lru_size
>>> # grep itable <client-statedump> | grep purge | wc -l
>>> # grep itable <client-statedump> | grep purge_size
>>
>> Had to restart the test and have been running for 36 hours now. RSS is
>> currently up to 23g.
>>
>> Working on getting a bug report with link to the dumps. In the mean
>> time, I'm including the results of your above queries for the first
>> dump, the 18 hour dump, and the 36 hour dump:
>>
>> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517104561 | grep active | wc -l
>> 53865
>> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517169361 | grep active | wc -l
>> 53864
>> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517234161 | grep active | wc -l
>> 53864
>>
>> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517104561 | grep active_size
>> xlator.mount.fuse.itable.active_size=53864
>> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517169361 | grep active_size
>> xlator.mount.fuse.itable.active_size=53863
>> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517234161 | grep active_size
>> xlator.mount.fuse.itable.active_size=53863
>>
>> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517104561 | grep lru | wc -l
>> 998510
>> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517169361 | grep lru | wc -l
>> 998510
>> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517234161 | grep lru | wc -l
>> 995992
>>
>> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517104561 | grep lru_size
>> xlator.mount.fuse.itable.lru_size=998508
>> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517169361 | grep lru_size
>> xlator.mount.fuse.itable.lru_size=998508
>> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517234161 | grep lru_size
>> xlator.mount.fuse.itable.lru_size=995990
> 
> Around 1 million of inodes in lru table!! These are the inodes kernel has
just cached and no operation is currently progress on these inodes. This could
be the reason for high memory usage. We've a patch being worked on (merged
on experimental branch currently) [1], that will help in these sceanrios. In the
meantime can you remount glusterfs with options --entry-timeout=0 and
--attribute-timeout=0? This will make sure that kernel won't cache
inodes/attributes of the file and should bring down the memory usage.
> 
> I am curious to know what is your data-set like? Is it the case of too many
directories and files present in deep directories? I am wondering whether a
significant number of inodes cached by kernel are there to hold dentry structure
in kernel.
> 
> [1] https://review.gluster.org/#/c/18665/
>
OK, remounted with your recommended attributes and repeated the test. 
Now the mount process looks like this:

/usr/sbin/glusterfs --attribute-timeout=0 --entry-timeout=0 
--volfile-server=localhost --volfile-id=/GlusterWWW /var/www

However after running for 36 hours it's again at about 23g (about the 
same place it was on the first test).

A few metrics from the 36 hour mark:

num_allocs for [cluster/distribute.GlusterWWW-dht - usage-type 
gf_dht_mt_dht_layout_t memusage] is 109140094. Seems at least somewhat 
similar to the original test, which had 117901593 at the 36 hour mark.

The dump file at the 36 hour mark had nothing for lru or lru_size. 
However, at the dump two hours prior it had:

# grep itable glusterdump.67299.dump.1517493361 | grep lru | wc -l
998510
# grep itable glusterdump.67299.dump.1517493361 | grep lru_size
xlator.mount.fuse.itable.lru_size=998508

and the same thing for the dump four hours later. Are these values only 
relevant when the ls -R is actually running? I'm thinking the 36 hour 
dump may have caught the ls -R between runs there (?)

The data set is multiple Web sites. I know there's some litter there we 
can clean up, but I'd guess not more than 200-300k files or so. The 
biggest culprit is a single directory that we use as a multi-purpose 
file store, with filenames stored as GUIDs and linked to a DB. That 
directory currently has 500k+ files. Another directory serves a similar 
purpose and has about 66k files in it. The rest is generally distributed 
more "normally", I.E., a mixed nesting of directories and files.

Cheers!

Dan
>>
>> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517104561 | grep purge | wc -l
>> 1
>> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517169361 | grep purge | wc -l
>> 1
>> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517234161 | grep purge | wc -l
>> 1
>>
>> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517104561 | grep purge_size
>> xlator.mount.fuse.itable.purge_size=0
>> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517169361 | grep purge_size
>> xlator.mount.fuse.itable.purge_size=0
>> # grep itable glusterdump.153904.dump.1517234161 | grep purge_size
>> xlator.mount.fuse.itable.purge_size=0
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Dan
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I've CC'd the fuse/ dht devs to see if these data types
have potential
>>>> leaks. Could you raise a bug with the volume info and a
(dropbox?) link
>>>> from which we can download the dumps? You can remove/replace
the
>>>> filepaths from them.
>>>>
>>>> Regards.
>>>> Ravi
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers!
>>>>>
>>>>> Dan
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is there potentially something misconfigured here?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I did see a reference to a memory leak in another
thread in this
>>>>>>> list, but that had to do with the setting of
quotas, I don't have
>>>>>>> any quotas set on my system.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dan Ragle
>>>>>>> daniel at Biblestuph.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 1/25/2018 11:04 AM, Dan Ragle wrote:
>>>>>>>> Having a memory issue with Gluster 3.12.4 and
not sure how to
>>>>>>>> troubleshoot. I don't *think* this is
expected behavior. This is on an
>>>>>>>> updated CentOS 7 box. The setup is a simple two
node replicated layout
>>>>>>>> where the two nodes act as both server and
client. The volume in
>>>>>>>> question: Volume Name: GlusterWWW Type:
Replicate Volume ID:
>>>>>>>> 8e9b0e79-f309-4d9b-a5bb-45d065faaaa3 Status:
Started Snapshot Count: 0
>>>>>>>> Number of Bricks: 1 x 2 = 2 Transport-type: tcp
Bricks: Brick1:
>>>>>>>>
vs1dlan.mydomain.com:/glusterfs_bricks/brick1/www Brick2:
>>>>>>>>
vs2dlan.mydomain.com:/glusterfs_bricks/brick1/www Options
>>>>>>>> Reconfigured:
>>>>>>>> nfs.disable: on cluster.favorite-child-policy:
mtime
>>>>>>>> transport.address-family: inet I had some other
performance options in
>>>>>>>> there, (increased cache-size, md invalidation,
etc) but stripped them
>>>>>>>> out in an attempt to isolate the issue. Still
got the problem without
>>>>>>>> them. The volume currently contains over 1M
files. When mounting the
>>>>>>>> volume, I get (among other things) a process as
such:
>>>>>>>> /usr/sbin/glusterfs --volfile-server=localhost
>>>>>>>> --volfile-id=/GlusterWWW
>>>>>>>> /var/www This process begins with little
memory, but then as files are
>>>>>>>> accessed in the volume the memory increases. I
setup a script that
>>>>>>>> simply reads the files in the volume one at a
time (no writes). It's
>>>>>>>> been running on and off about 12 hours now and
the resident memory of
>>>>>>>> the above process is already at 7.5G and
continues to grow slowly.
>>>>>>>> If I
>>>>>>>> stop the test script the memory stops growing,
but does not reduce.
>>>>>>>> Restart the test script and the memory begins
slowly growing again.
>>>>>>>> This
>>>>>>>> is obviously a contrived app environment. With
my intended application
>>>>>>>> load it takes about a week or so for the memory
to get high enough to
>>>>>>>> invoke the oom killer. Is there potentially
something misconfigured
>>>>>>>> here? Thanks, Dan Ragle daniel at
Biblestuph.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Gluster-users mailing list
>>>>>>>> Gluster-users at gluster.org
>>>>>>>>
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Gluster-users mailing list
>>>>>>> Gluster-users at gluster.org
>>>>>>>
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Gluster-users mailing list
>>>>> Gluster-users at gluster.org
>>>>> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Maybe Matching Threads

Search for more seemingly similar threads

Gluster users - Jan 2018 - Run away memory with gluster mount

[Gluster-users] Run away memory with gluster mount

[Gluster-users] Run away memory with gluster mount

[Gluster-users] Run away memory with gluster mount

Maybe Matching Threads