On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 8:51 PM, Christian Balzer <chibi@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, 8 Dec 2014 20:36:17 -0800 Gregory Farnum wrote: > >> They never fixed themselves? > As I wrote, it took a restart of OSD 8 to resolve this on the next day. > >> Did the reported times ever increase? > Indeed, the last before the reboot was: > --- > 2014-12-07 13:12:42.933396 7fceac82f700 0 log [WRN] : 14 slow requests, 5 included below; oldest blocked for > 64336.578995 secs > --- > > All IOPS hitting that osd.8 (eventually the other VM did as well during a > log write I suppose) were blocked. > >> If not I think that's just a reporting bug which is fixed in an >> unreleased branch, but I'd have to check the tracker to be sure. >> >> On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Christian Balzer <chibi@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> > >> > Hello, >> > >> > On Mon, 8 Dec 2014 19:51:00 -0800 Gregory Farnum wrote: >> > >> >> On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 6:39 PM, Christian Balzer <chibi@xxxxxxx> >> >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > Hello, >> >> > >> >> > Debian Jessie cluster, thus kernel 3.16, ceph 0.80.7. >> >> > 3 storage nodes with 8 OSDs (journals on 4 SSDs) each, 3 mons. >> >> > 2 compute nodes, everything connected via Infiniband. >> >> > >> >> > This is pre-production, currently there are only 3 VMs and 2 of them >> >> > were idle at the time. The non-idle one was having 600GB of maildirs >> >> > copied onto it, which stresses things but not Ceph as those millions >> >> > of small files coalesce nicely and result in rather few Ceph ops. >> >> > >> >> > A couple of hours into that copy marathon (the source FS and machine >> >> > are slow and rsync isn't particular speedy with this kind of >> >> > operation either) this happened: >> >> > --- >> >> > 2014-12-06 19:20:57.023974 osd.23 10.0.8.23:6815/3552 77 : [WRN] >> >> > slow request 30 .673939 seconds old, received at 2014-12-06 >> >> > 19:20:26.346746: osd_op(client.33776 .0:743596 >> >> > rb.0.819b.238e1f29.00000003f52f [set-alloc-hint object_size 4194304 >> >> > wr ite_size 4194304,write 1748992~4096] 3.efa97e35 ack+ondisk+write >> >> > e380) v4 curren tly waiting for subops from 4,8 2014-12-06 >> >> > 19:20:57.023991 osd.23 10.0.8.23:6815/3552 78 : [WRN] slow request >> >> > 30 .673886 seconds old, received at 2014-12-06 19:20:26.346799: >> >> > osd_op(client.33776 .0:743597 rb.0.819b.238e1f29.00000003f52f >> >> > [set-alloc-hint object_size 4194304 wr ite_size 4194304,write >> >> > 1945600~4096] 3.efa97e35 ack+ondisk+write e380) v4 curren tly >> >> > waiting for subops from 4,8 2014-12-06 19:20:57.323976 osd.1 >> >> > 10.0.8.21:6815/4868 123 : [WRN] slow request 30 .910821 seconds old, >> >> > received at 2014-12-06 19:20:26.413051: >> >> > osd_op(client.33776 .0:743604 rb.0.819b.238e1f29.00000003e628 >> >> > [set-alloc-hint object_size 4194304 wr ite_size 4194304,write >> >> > 1794048~1835008] 3.5e76b8ba ack+ondisk+write e380) v4 cur rently >> >> > waiting for subops from 8,17 --- >> >> > >> >> > There were a few more later, but they all involved OSD 8 as common >> >> > factor. >> >> > >> >> > Alas there's nothing in the osd-8.log indicating why: >> >> > --- >> >> > 2014-12-06 19:13:13.933636 7fce85552700 0 -- 10.0.8.22:6835/5389 >> >> >> > 10.0.8.6:0/ 716350435 pipe(0x7fcec3c25900 sd=23 :6835 s=0 pgs=0 cs=0 >> >> > l=0 c=0x7fcebfad03c0).a ccept peer addr is really >> >> > 10.0.8.6:0/716350435 (socket is 10.0.8.6:50592/0) 2014-12-06 >> >> > 19:20:56.595773 7fceac82f700 0 log [WRN] : 3 slow requests, 3 >> >> > included below; oldest blocked for > 30.241397 secs 2014-12-06 >> >> > 19:20:56.595796 7fceac82f700 0 log [WRN] : slow request 30.241397 >> >> > seconds old, received at 2014-12-06 19:20:26.354247: >> >> > osd_sub_op(client.33776.0:743596 3.235 >> >> > efa97e35/rb.0.819b.238e1f29.00000003f52f/head//3 [] v 380'3783 >> >> > snapset=0=[]:[] snapc=0=[]) v11 currently started 2014-12-06 >> >> > 19:20:56.595825 7fceac82f700 0 log [WRN] : slow request 30.240286 >> >> > seconds old, received at 2014-12-06 19:20:26.355358: >> >> > osd_sub_op(client.33776.0:743597 3.235 >> >> > efa97e35/rb.0.819b.238e1f29.00000003f52f/head//3 [] v 380'3784 >> >> > snapset=0=[]:[] snapc=0=[]) v11 currently started 2014-12-06 >> >> > 19:20:56.595837 7fceac82f700 0 log [WRN] : slow request 30.177186 >> >> > seconds old, received at 2014-12-06 19:20:26.418458: >> >> > osd_sub_op(client.33776.0:743604 3.ba >> >> > 5e76b8ba/rb.0.819b.238e1f29.00000003e628/head//3 [] v 380'6439 >> >> > snapset=0=[]:[] snapc=0=[]) v11 currently started ---- >> >> >> >> That these are started and nothing else suggests that they're probably >> >> waiting for one of the throttles to let them in, rather than >> >> themselves being particularly slow. >> >> >> > >> > If this was indeed caused by one of the (rather numerous) throttles, >> > wouldn't it be a good idea to log that fact? >> > A slow disk is one thing, Ceph permanently seizing up because something >> > exceeded a threshold sounds noteworthy to me. >> >> If it permanently seized up then this is not what happened; > > So am I looking at an unknown bug then? Hmm, not sure. Any kind of bug which blocks or drops an op can cause this; some have been fixed in Firefly but I don't see anything obvious in between the v0.80.7 release and firefly HEAD. Sam might know. -Greg _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |