Sorry, I have written too less yesterday because of being sleepy. That`s obviously a cache pressure since dropping caches resulted in disappearance of this errors for a long period. I`m not very familiar with kernel memory mechanisms, but shouldn`t kernel try to allocate memory on the second node if this not prohibited by process` cpuset first and only then report allocation failure(as can be seen only node 0 involved in the failures)? I really have no idea where numa-awareness may be count in case of osd daemons. On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 2:42 AM, Andrey Korolyov <andrey@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, > > Those traces happens only constant high constant writes and seems to > be very rarely. OSD processes do not consume more memory after this > event and peaks are not distinguishable by monitoring. I have able to > catch it having four-hour constant writes on the cluster. > > http://xdel.ru/downloads/ceph-log/allocation-failure/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
