Hi Sage, I gave that script a try. Interestingly, I ended up with a core file from gdb itself. # file core core: ELF 64-bit LSB core file x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), SVR4-style, from 'gdb --batch --pid 29361 -ex dump memory 29361-04bbb000-57bf58000.dump 0x04bbb00' So I think gdb crashed. But before that happened, I did get 195M of output. However, I was expecting a full 20+ GBs. Not sure if what I generated can be of use or not. If so, I can tar and compress it all and place it somewhere useful if you like. At it's current size, I could host it in dropbox for you to pull down. At 20GB (if that had worked) I would need a place to scp it. - Travis On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 8:12 PM, Sage Weil <sage@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, 25 Feb 2013, Travis Rhoden wrote: >> Right now everything is on a stock setup. I believe that means no core file. >> >> root@ceph2:~# ulimit -c >> 0 >> >> Doh. I don't see anything in the ceph init script that would increase >> this for the ceph-* processes. Which is probably a good thing, of >> course. > > Can you try something like this to grab an image of the process memory? > > #!/bin/bash > grep rw-p /proc/$1/maps | sed -n 's/^\([0-9a-f]*\)-\([0-9a-f]*\) .*$/\1 \2/p' | while read start stop; do gdb --batch --pid $1 -ex "dump memory $1-$start-$stop.dump 0x$start 0x$stop"; done > > (from http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12977179/reading-living-process-memory-without-interrupting-it-proc-kcore-is-an-option) > > THanks! > sage > > > > > >> >> On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 7:40 PM, Sage Weil <sage@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Mon, 25 Feb 2013, Travis Rhoden wrote: >> >> Joao, >> >> >> >> Happy to help if I can. responses inline. >> >> >> >> On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Joao Eduardo Luis >> >> <joao.luis@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> > On 02/25/2013 07:59 PM, Travis Rhoden wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> Hi folks, >> >> >> >> >> >> A question about memory usage by the Mon. I have a cluster that is >> >> >> being used exclusively for RBD (no CephFS/mds). I have 5 mons, and >> >> >> one is slowly but surely using a heck of a lot more memory than the >> >> >> others: >> >> >> >> >> >> # for x in ceph{1..5}; do ssh $x 'ps aux | grep ceph-mon | grep -v grep'; >> >> >> done >> >> >> root 31034 5.2 0.1 312116 75516 ? Ssl Feb14 881:51 >> >> >> /usr/bin/ceph-mon -i a --pid-file /var/run/ceph/mon.a.pid -c >> >> >> /etc/ceph/ceph.conf >> >> >> root 29361 4.8 53.9 22526128 22238080 ? Ssl Feb14 822:36 >> >> >> /usr/bin/ceph-mon -i b --pid-file /var/run/ceph/mon.b.pid -c >> >> >> /tmp/ceph.conf.31144 >> >> >> root 28421 7.0 0.1 273608 88608 ? Ssl Feb20 516:48 >> >> >> /usr/bin/ceph-mon -i c --pid-file /var/run/ceph/mon.c.pid -c >> >> >> /tmp/ceph.conf.10625 >> >> >> root 25876 4.8 0.1 240752 84048 ? Ssl Feb14 816:54 >> >> >> /usr/bin/ceph-mon -i d --pid-file /var/run/ceph/mon.d.pid -c >> >> >> /tmp/ceph.conf.31537 >> >> >> root 24505 4.8 0.1 228720 79284 ? Ssl Feb14 818:14 >> >> >> /usr/bin/ceph-mon -i e --pid-file /var/run/ceph/mon.e.pid -c >> >> >> /tmp/ceph.conf.31734 >> >> >> >> >> >> As you can see, one is up over 20GB, while the others are < 100MB. >> >> >> >> >> >> Is this normal? The box has plenty of RAM -- I'm wondering if this is >> >> >> a memory leak, or if it's just slowly finding more things it can cache >> >> >> and such. >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > Hi Travis, >> >> > >> >> > Which version are you running? >> >> > >> >> # ceph --version >> >> ceph version 0.56.3 (6eb7e15a4783b122e9b0c85ea9ba064145958aa5) >> >> >> >> That's the case all around OSDs, mons, librbd clients, everything in my cluster >> >> > This has been something that pops in the list every now and then, and I've >> >> > spent a considerable amount of time trying to track it down. >> >> > >> >> > My current suspicion lies on the in-memory pgmap growing, and growing, and >> >> > growing... and it usually hits the leader the worst. Can you please confirm >> >> > that mon.b is indeed the leader? >> >> I'm not 100% sure how to do that. I'm guessing rank 0 from the >> >> following output? >> >> >> >> # ceph quorum_status >> >> { "election_epoch": 32, >> >> "quorum": [ >> >> 0, >> >> 1, >> >> 2, >> >> 3, >> >> 4], >> >> "monmap": { "epoch": 1, >> >> "fsid": "d5229b51-5321-48d2-bbb2-16062abb1992", >> >> "modified": "2013-01-21 17:58:14.389411", >> >> "created": "2013-01-21 17:58:14.389411", >> >> "mons": [ >> >> { "rank": 0, >> >> "name": "a", >> >> "addr": "10.10.30.1:6789\/0"}, >> >> { "rank": 1, >> >> "name": "b", >> >> "addr": "10.10.30.2:6789\/0"}, >> >> { "rank": 2, >> >> "name": "c", >> >> "addr": "10.10.30.3:6789\/0"}, >> >> { "rank": 3, >> >> "name": "d", >> >> "addr": "10.10.30.4:6789\/0"}, >> >> { "rank": 4, >> >> "name": "e", >> >> "addr": "10.10.30.5:6789\/0"}]}} >> >> >> >> That would seem to imply that mon a is the leader. mon b is >> >> definitely the problem child at the moment. >> >> >> >> I did a quick check, and mon b has grown by ~ 400MB since my previous >> >> email. So we're looking at a little under 100MB/hr, perhaps. Not >> >> sure if that's consistent or not. WIll certainly check again in the >> >> morning. >> > >> > Do you know if there is a core file ulimit set on that process? If the >> > core is configured to go somewhere, a kill -SEGV on it would generate a >> > core that would help us figure out what the memory is consumed by. >> > >> > Thanks! >> > sage >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |