Ok, just to make sure that I understand: >>tcmalloc un-tuned: ~50k IOPS once bug sets in yes, it's really random, but when hitting the bug, yes this is the worste I have seen. >>tcmalloc with patch and 128MB thread cache bytes: ~195k IOPS yes >>jemalloc un-tuned: ~150k IOPS It's more around 185k iops (a little bit less than tcmalloc, with a little bit more cpu usage) ----- Mail original ----- De: "Mark Nelson" <mnelson@xxxxxxxxxx> À: "aderumier" <aderumier@xxxxxxxxx> Cc: "ceph-users" <ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "ceph-devel" <ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Milosz Tanski" <milosz@xxxxxxxxx> Envoyé: Lundi 27 Avril 2015 18:34:50 Objet: Re: strange benchmark problem : restarting osd daemon improve performance from 100k iops to 300k iops On 04/27/2015 10:11 AM, Alexandre DERUMIER wrote: >>> Is it possible that you were suffering from the bug during the first >>> test but once reinstalled you hadn't hit it yet? > > yes, I'm pretty sure I'm hitting the tcmalloc bug since the beginning. > I had patched it, but I think it's not enough. > I had always this bug in random, but mainly when I have a "lot" of concurrent client (20 -40). > more client increase - lower iops . > > > Today,I had try to start osd with TCMALLOC_MAX_TOTAL_THREAD_CACHE_BYTES=128M , > and now it's working fine in all my benchs. > > >>> That's a pretty major >>> performance swing. I'm not sure if we can draw any conclusions about >>> jemalloc vs tcmalloc until we can figure out what went wrong. > > From my bench, jemalloc use a little bit more cpu than tcmalloc (maybe 1% or 2%). > Tcmalloc seem to works better, with correct tuning of thread_cache_bytes. > > > But I don't known how to tune TCMALLOC_MAX_TOTAL_THREAD_CACHE_BYTES correctly. > Maybe Sommath can tell us ? Ok, just to make sure that I understand: tcmalloc un-tuned: ~50k IOPS once bug sets in tcmalloc with patch and 128MB thread cache bytes: ~195k IOPS jemalloc un-tuned: ~150k IOPS Is that correct? Are there configurations/results I'm missing? Mark > > > ----- Mail original ----- > De: "Mark Nelson" <mnelson@xxxxxxxxxx> > À: "aderumier" <aderumier@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: "ceph-users" <ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "ceph-devel" <ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Milosz Tanski" <milosz@xxxxxxxxx> > Envoyé: Lundi 27 Avril 2015 16:54:34 > Objet: Re: strange benchmark problem : restarting osd daemon improve performance from 100k iops to 300k iops > > Hi Alex, > > Is it possible that you were suffering from the bug during the first > test but once reinstalled you hadn't hit it yet? That's a pretty major > performance swing. I'm not sure if we can draw any conclusions about > jemalloc vs tcmalloc until we can figure out what went wrong. > > Mark > > On 04/27/2015 12:46 AM, Alexandre DERUMIER wrote: >>>> I'll retest tcmalloc, because I was prety sure to have patched it correctly. >> >> Ok, I really think I have patched tcmalloc wrongly. >> I have repatched it, reinstalled it, and now I'm getting 195k iops with a single osd (10fio rbd jobs 4k randread). >> >> So better than jemalloc. >> >> >> ----- Mail original ----- >> De: "aderumier" <aderumier@xxxxxxxxx> >> À: "Mark Nelson" <mnelson@xxxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: "ceph-users" <ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "ceph-devel" <ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Milosz Tanski" <milosz@xxxxxxxxx> >> Envoyé: Lundi 27 Avril 2015 07:01:21 >> Objet: Re: strange benchmark problem : restarting osd daemon improve performance from 100k iops to 300k iops >> >> Hi, >> >> also another big difference, >> >> I can reach now 180k iops with a single jemalloc osd (data in buffer) vs 50k iops max with tcmalloc. >> >> I'll retest tcmalloc, because I was prety sure to have patched it correctly. >> >> >> ----- Mail original ----- >> De: "aderumier" <aderumier@xxxxxxxxx> >> À: "Mark Nelson" <mnelson@xxxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: "ceph-users" <ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "ceph-devel" <ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Milosz Tanski" <milosz@xxxxxxxxx> >> Envoyé: Samedi 25 Avril 2015 06:45:43 >> Objet: Re: strange benchmark problem : restarting osd daemon improve performance from 100k iops to 300k iops >> >>>> We haven't done any kind of real testing on jemalloc, so use at your own >>>> peril. Having said that, we've also been very interested in hearing >>>> community feedback from folks trying it out, so please feel free to give >>>> it a shot. :D >> >> Some feedback, I have runned bench all the night, no speed regression. >> >> And I have a speed increase with fio with more jobs. (with tcmalloc, it seem to be the reverse) >> >> with tcmalloc : >> >> 10 fio-rbd jobs = 300k iops >> 15 fio-rbd jobs = 290k iops >> 20 fio-rbd jobs = 270k iops >> 40 fio-rbd jobs = 250k iops >> >> (all with up and down values during the fio bench) >> >> >> with jemalloc: >> >> 10 fio-rbd jobs = 300k iops >> 15 fio-rbd jobs = 320k iops >> 20 fio-rbd jobs = 330k iops >> 40 fio-rbd jobs = 370k iops (can get more currently, only 1 client machine with 20cores 100%) >> >> (all with contant values during the fio bench) >> >> ----- Mail original ----- >> De: "Mark Nelson" <mnelson@xxxxxxxxxx> >> À: "Stefan Priebe" <s.priebe@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "aderumier" <aderumier@xxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: "ceph-users" <ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "ceph-devel" <ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Somnath Roy" <Somnath.Roy@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "Milosz Tanski" <milosz@xxxxxxxxx> >> Envoyé: Vendredi 24 Avril 2015 20:02:15 >> Objet: Re: strange benchmark problem : restarting osd daemon improve performance from 100k iops to 300k iops >> >> We haven't done any kind of real testing on jemalloc, so use at your own >> peril. Having said that, we've also been very interested in hearing >> community feedback from folks trying it out, so please feel free to give >> it a shot. :D >> >> Mark >> >> On 04/24/2015 12:36 PM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote: >>> Is jemalloc recommanded in general? Does it also work for firefly? >>> >>> Stefan >>> >>> Excuse my typo sent from my mobile phone. >>> >>> Am 24.04.2015 um 18:38 schrieb Alexandre DERUMIER <aderumier@xxxxxxxxx >>> <mailto:aderumier@xxxxxxxxx>>: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I have finished to rebuild ceph with jemalloc, >>>> >>>> all seem to working fine. >>>> >>>> I got a constant 300k iops for the moment, so no speed regression. >>>> >>>> I'll do more long benchmark next week. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Alexandre >>>> >>>> ----- Mail original ----- >>>> De: "Irek Fasikhov" <malmyzh@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:malmyzh@xxxxxxxxx>> >>>> À: "Somnath Roy" <Somnath.Roy@xxxxxxxxxxx >>>> <mailto:Somnath.Roy@xxxxxxxxxxx>> >>>> Cc: "aderumier" <aderumier@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:aderumier@xxxxxxxxx>>, >>>> "Mark Nelson" <mnelson@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:mnelson@xxxxxxxxxx>>, >>>> "ceph-users" <ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>> <mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>, "ceph-devel" >>>> <ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>, >>>> "Milosz Tanski" <milosz@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:milosz@xxxxxxxxx>> >>>> Envoyé: Vendredi 24 Avril 2015 13:37:52 >>>> Objet: Re: strange benchmark problem : restarting osd >>>> daemon improve performance from 100k iops to 300k iops >>>> >>>> Hi,Alexandre! >>>> Do not try to change the parameter vm.min_free_kbytes? >>>> >>>> 2015-04-23 19:24 GMT+03:00 Somnath Roy < Somnath.Roy@xxxxxxxxxxx >>>> <mailto:Somnath.Roy@xxxxxxxxxxx> > : >>>> >>>> >>>> Alexandre, >>>> You can configure with --with-jemalloc or ./do_autogen -J to build >>>> ceph with jemalloc. >>>> >>>> Thanks & Regards >>>> Somnath >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: ceph-users [mailto: ceph-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>> <mailto:ceph-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> ] On Behalf Of Alexandre >>>> DERUMIER >>>> Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2015 4:56 AM >>>> To: Mark Nelson >>>> Cc: ceph-users; ceph-devel; Milosz Tanski >>>> Subject: Re: strange benchmark problem : restarting osd >>>> daemon improve performance from 100k iops to 300k iops >>>> >>>>>> If you have the means to compile the same version of ceph with >>>>>> jemalloc, I would be very interested to see how it does. >>>> >>>> Yes, sure. (I have around 3-4 weeks to do all the benchs) >>>> >>>> But I don't know how to do it ? >>>> I'm running the cluster on centos7.1, maybe it can be easy to patch >>>> the srpms to rebuild the package with jemalloc. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- Mail original ----- >>>> De: "Mark Nelson" < mnelson@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:mnelson@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> À: "aderumier" < aderumier@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:aderumier@xxxxxxxxx> >, >>>> "Srinivasula Maram" < Srinivasula.Maram@xxxxxxxxxxx >>>> <mailto:Srinivasula.Maram@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> Cc: "ceph-users" < ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>> <mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >, "ceph-devel" < >>>> ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >, >>>> "Milosz Tanski" < milosz@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:milosz@xxxxxxxxx> > >>>> Envoyé: Jeudi 23 Avril 2015 13:33:00 >>>> Objet: Re: strange benchmark problem : restarting osd >>>> daemon improve performance from 100k iops to 300k iops >>>> >>>> Thanks for the testing Alexandre! >>>> >>>> If you have the means to compile the same version of ceph with >>>> jemalloc, I would be very interested to see how it does. >>>> >>>> In some ways I'm glad it turned out not to be NUMA. I still suspect we >>>> will have to deal with it at some point, but perhaps not today. ;) >>>> >>>> Mark >>>> >>>> On 04/23/2015 05:58 AM, Alexandre DERUMIER wrote: >>>>> Maybe it's tcmalloc related >>>>> I thinked to have patched it correctly, but perf show a lot of >>>>> tcmalloc::ThreadCache::ReleaseToCentralCache >>>>> >>>>> before osd restart (100k) >>>>> ------------------ >>>>> 11.66% ceph-osd libtcmalloc.so.4.1.2 [.] >>>>> tcmalloc::ThreadCache::ReleaseToCentralCache >>>>> 8.51% ceph-osd libtcmalloc.so.4.1.2 [.] >>>>> tcmalloc::CentralFreeList::FetchFromSpans >>>>> 3.04% ceph-osd libtcmalloc.so.4.1.2 [.] >>>>> tcmalloc::CentralFreeList::ReleaseToSpans >>>>> 2.04% ceph-osd libtcmalloc.so.4.1.2 [.] operator new 1.63% swapper >>>>> [kernel.kallsyms] [k] intel_idle 1.35% ceph-osd libtcmalloc.so.4.1.2 >>>>> [.] tcmalloc::CentralFreeList::ReleaseListToSpans >>>>> 1.33% ceph-osd libtcmalloc.so.4.1.2 [.] operator delete 1.07% ceph-osd >>>>> libstdc++.so.6.0.19 [.] std::basic_string<char, >>>>> std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >::basic_string 0.91% >>>>> ceph-osd libpthread-2.17.so [.] pthread_mutex_trylock 0.88% ceph-osd >>>>> libc-2.17.so [.] __memcpy_ssse3_back 0.81% ceph-osd ceph-osd [.] >>>>> Mutex::Lock 0.79% ceph-osd [kernel.kallsyms] [k] >>>>> copy_user_enhanced_fast_string 0.74% ceph-osd libpthread-2.17.so [.] >>>>> pthread_mutex_unlock 0.67% ceph-osd [kernel.kallsyms] [k] >>>>> _raw_spin_lock 0.63% swapper [kernel.kallsyms] [k] >>>>> native_write_msr_safe 0.62% ceph-osd [kernel.kallsyms] [k] >>>>> avc_has_perm_noaudit 0.58% ceph-osd ceph-osd [.] operator< 0.57% >>>>> ceph-osd [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __schedule 0.57% ceph-osd >>>>> [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __d_lookup_rcu 0.54% swapper [kernel.kallsyms] >>>>> [k] __schedule >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> after osd restart (300k iops) >>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>> 3.47% ceph-osd libtcmalloc.so.4.1.2 [.] operator new 1.92% ceph-osd >>>>> libtcmalloc.so.4.1.2 [.] operator delete 1.86% swapper >>>>> [kernel.kallsyms] [k] intel_idle 1.52% ceph-osd libstdc++.so.6.0.19 >>>>> [.] std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, >>>>> std::allocator<char> >::basic_string 1.34% ceph-osd >>>>> libtcmalloc.so.4.1.2 [.] tcmalloc::ThreadCache::ReleaseToCentralCache >>>>> 1.24% ceph-osd libc-2.17.so [.] __memcpy_ssse3_back 1.23% ceph-osd >>>>> ceph-osd [.] Mutex::Lock 1.21% ceph-osd libpthread-2.17.so [.] >>>>> pthread_mutex_trylock 1.11% ceph-osd [kernel.kallsyms] [k] >>>>> copy_user_enhanced_fast_string 0.95% ceph-osd libpthread-2.17.so [.] >>>>> pthread_mutex_unlock 0.94% ceph-osd [kernel.kallsyms] [k] >>>>> _raw_spin_lock 0.78% ceph-osd [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __d_lookup_rcu >>>>> 0.70% ceph-osd [kernel.kallsyms] [k] tcp_sendmsg 0.70% ceph-osd >>>>> ceph-osd [.] Message::Message 0.68% ceph-osd [kernel.kallsyms] [k] >>>>> __schedule 0.66% ceph-osd [kernel.kallsyms] [k] idle_cpu 0.65% >>>>> ceph-osd libtcmalloc.so.4.1.2 [.] >>>>> tcmalloc::CentralFreeList::FetchFromSpans >>>>> 0.64% swapper [kernel.kallsyms] [k] native_write_msr_safe 0.61% >>>>> ceph-osd ceph-osd [.] >>>>> std::tr1::_Sp_counted_base<(__gnu_cxx::_Lock_policy)2>::_M_release >>>>> 0.60% swapper [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __schedule 0.60% ceph-osd >>>>> libstdc++.so.6.0.19 [.] 0x00000000000bdd2b 0.57% ceph-osd ceph-osd [.] >>>>> operator< 0.57% ceph-osd ceph-osd [.] crc32_iscsi_00 0.56% ceph-osd >>>>> libstdc++.so.6.0.19 [.] std::string::_Rep::_M_dispose 0.55% ceph-osd >>>>> [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __switch_to 0.54% ceph-osd libc-2.17.so [.] >>>>> vfprintf 0.52% ceph-osd [kernel.kallsyms] [k] fget_light >>>>> >>>>> ----- Mail original ----- >>>>> De: "aderumier" < aderumier@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:aderumier@xxxxxxxxx> > >>>>> À: "Srinivasula Maram" < Srinivasula.Maram@xxxxxxxxxxx >>>>> <mailto:Srinivasula.Maram@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>> Cc: "ceph-users" < ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>>> <mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >, "ceph-devel" >>>>> < ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >, >>>>> "Milosz Tanski" < milosz@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:milosz@xxxxxxxxx> > >>>>> Envoyé: Jeudi 23 Avril 2015 10:00:34 >>>>> Objet: Re: strange benchmark problem : restarting osd >>>>> daemon improve performance from 100k iops to 300k iops >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> I'm hitting this bug again today. >>>>> >>>>> So don't seem to be numa related (I have try to flush linux buffer to >>>>> be sure). >>>>> >>>>> and tcmalloc is patched (I don't known how to verify that it's ok). >>>>> >>>>> I don't have restarted osd yet. >>>>> >>>>> Maybe some perf trace could be usefulll ? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ----- Mail original ----- >>>>> De: "aderumier" < aderumier@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:aderumier@xxxxxxxxx> > >>>>> À: "Srinivasula Maram" < Srinivasula.Maram@xxxxxxxxxxx >>>>> <mailto:Srinivasula.Maram@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>> Cc: "ceph-users" < ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>>> <mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >, "ceph-devel" >>>>> < ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >, >>>>> "Milosz Tanski" < milosz@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:milosz@xxxxxxxxx> > >>>>> Envoyé: Mercredi 22 Avril 2015 18:30:26 >>>>> Objet: Re: strange benchmark problem : restarting osd >>>>> daemon improve performance from 100k iops to 300k iops >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>>>> I feel it is due to tcmalloc issue >>>>> >>>>> Indeed, I had patched one of my node, but not the other. >>>>> So maybe I have hit this bug. (but I can't confirm, I don't have >>>>> traces). >>>>> >>>>> But numa interleaving seem to help in my case (maybe not from >>>>> 100->300k, but 250k->300k). >>>>> >>>>> I need to do more long tests to confirm that. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ----- Mail original ----- >>>>> De: "Srinivasula Maram" < Srinivasula.Maram@xxxxxxxxxxx >>>>> <mailto:Srinivasula.Maram@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>> À: "Mark Nelson" < mnelson@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:mnelson@xxxxxxxxxx> >, >>>>> "aderumier" >>>>> < aderumier@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:aderumier@xxxxxxxxx> >, "Milosz Tanski" >>>>> < milosz@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:milosz@xxxxxxxxx> > >>>>> Cc: "ceph-devel" < ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>>> <mailto:ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >, "ceph-users" >>>>> < ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>> Envoyé: Mercredi 22 Avril 2015 16:34:33 >>>>> Objet: RE: strange benchmark problem : restarting osd >>>>> daemon improve performance from 100k iops to 300k iops >>>>> >>>>> I feel it is due to tcmalloc issue >>>>> >>>>> I have seen similar issue in my setup after 20 days. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Srinivas >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: ceph-users [mailto: ceph-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>>> <mailto:ceph-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> ] On Behalf >>>>> Of Mark Nelson >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 7:31 PM >>>>> To: Alexandre DERUMIER; Milosz Tanski >>>>> Cc: ceph-devel; ceph-users >>>>> Subject: Re: strange benchmark problem : restarting osd >>>>> daemon improve performance from 100k iops to 300k iops >>>>> >>>>> Hi Alexandre, >>>>> >>>>> We should discuss this at the perf meeting today. We knew NUMA node >>>>> affinity issues were going to crop up sooner or later (and indeed >>>>> already have in some cases), but this is pretty major. It's probably >>>>> time to really dig in and figure out how to deal with this. >>>>> >>>>> Note: this is one of the reasons I like small nodes with single >>>>> sockets and fewer OSDs. >>>>> >>>>> Mark >>>>> >>>>> On 04/22/2015 08:56 AM, Alexandre DERUMIER wrote: >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> I have done a lot of test today, and it seem indeed numa related. >>>>>> >>>>>> My numastat was >>>>>> >>>>>> # numastat >>>>>> node0 node1 >>>>>> numa_hit 99075422 153976877 >>>>>> numa_miss 167490965 1493663 >>>>>> numa_foreign 1493663 167491417 >>>>>> interleave_hit 157745 167015 >>>>>> local_node 99049179 153830554 >>>>>> other_node 167517697 1639986 >>>>>> >>>>>> So, a lot of miss. >>>>>> >>>>>> In this case , I can reproduce ios going from 85k to 300k iops, up >>>>>> and down. >>>>>> >>>>>> now setting >>>>>> echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/numa_balancing >>>>>> >>>>>> and starting osd daemons with >>>>>> >>>>>> numactl --interleave=all /usr/bin/ceph-osd >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I have a constant 300k iops ! >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I wonder if it could be improve by binding osd daemons to specific >>>>>> numa node. >>>>>> I have 2 numanode of 10 cores with 6 osd, but I think it also >>>>>> require ceph.conf osd threads tunning. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Mail original ----- >>>>>> De: "Milosz Tanski" < milosz@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:milosz@xxxxxxxxx> > >>>>>> À: "aderumier" < aderumier@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:aderumier@xxxxxxxxx> > >>>>>> Cc: "ceph-devel" < ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>>>> <mailto:ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >, "ceph-users" >>>>>> < ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>>> Envoyé: Mercredi 22 Avril 2015 12:54:23 >>>>>> Objet: Re: strange benchmark problem : restarting osd >>>>>> daemon improve performance from 100k iops to 300k iops >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 5:01 AM, Alexandre DERUMIER < >>>>>> aderumier@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:aderumier@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I wonder if it could be numa related, >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm using centos 7.1, >>>>>> and auto numa balacning is enabled >>>>>> >>>>>> cat /proc/sys/kernel/numa_balancing = 1 >>>>>> >>>>>> Maybe osd daemon access to buffer on wrong numa node. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'll try to reproduce the problem >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Can you force the degenerate case using numactl? To either affirm or >>>>>> deny your suspicion. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Mail original ----- >>>>>> De: "aderumier" < aderumier@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:aderumier@xxxxxxxxx> > >>>>>> À: "ceph-devel" < ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>>>> <mailto:ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >, "ceph-users" < >>>>>> ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>>> Envoyé: Mercredi 22 Avril 2015 10:40:05 >>>>>> Objet: strange benchmark problem : restarting osd daemon >>>>>> improve performance from 100k iops to 300k iops >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> I was doing some benchmarks, >>>>>> I have found an strange behaviour. >>>>>> >>>>>> Using fio with rbd engine, I was able to reach around 100k iops. >>>>>> (osd datas in linux buffer, iostat show 0% disk access) >>>>>> >>>>>> then after restarting all osd daemons, >>>>>> >>>>>> the same fio benchmark show now around 300k iops. >>>>>> (osd datas in linux buffer, iostat show 0% disk access) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> any ideas? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> before restarting osd >>>>>> --------------------- >>>>>> rbd_iodepth32-test: (g=0): rw=randread, bs=4K-4K/4K-4K/4K-4K, >>>>>> ioengine=rbd, iodepth=32 ... >>>>>> fio-2.2.7-10-g51e9 >>>>>> Starting 10 processes >>>>>> rbd engine: RBD version: 0.1.9 >>>>>> rbd engine: RBD version: 0.1.9 >>>>>> rbd engine: RBD version: 0.1.9 >>>>>> rbd engine: RBD version: 0.1.9 >>>>>> rbd engine: RBD version: 0.1.9 >>>>>> rbd engine: RBD version: 0.1.9 >>>>>> rbd engine: RBD version: 0.1.9 >>>>>> rbd engine: RBD version: 0.1.9 >>>>>> rbd engine: RBD version: 0.1.9 >>>>>> rbd engine: RBD version: 0.1.9 >>>>>> ^Cbs: 10 (f=10): [r(10)] [2.9% done] [376.1MB/0KB/0KB /s] [96.6K/0/0 >>>>>> iops] [eta 14m:45s] >>>>>> fio: terminating on signal 2 >>>>>> >>>>>> rbd_iodepth32-test: (groupid=0, jobs=10): err= 0: pid=17075: Wed Apr >>>>>> 22 10:00:04 2015 read : io=11558MB, bw=451487KB/s, iops=112871, runt= >>>>>> 26215msec slat (usec): min=5, max=3685, avg=16.89, stdev=17.38 clat >>>>>> (usec): min=5, max=62584, avg=2695.80, stdev=5351.23 lat (usec): >>>>>> min=109, max=62598, avg=2712.68, stdev=5350.42 clat percentiles >>>>>> (usec): >>>>>> | 1.00th=[ 155], 5.00th=[ 183], 10.00th=[ 205], 20.00th=[ 247], >>>>>> | 30.00th=[ 294], 40.00th=[ 354], 50.00th=[ 446], 60.00th=[ 660], >>>>>> | 70.00th=[ 1176], 80.00th=[ 3152], 90.00th=[ 9024], 95.00th=[14656], >>>>>> | 99.00th=[25984], 99.50th=[30336], 99.90th=[38656], 99.95th=[41728], >>>>>> | 99.99th=[47360] >>>>>> bw (KB /s): min=23928, max=154416, per=10.07%, avg=45462.82, >>>>>> stdev=28809.95 lat (usec) : 10=0.01%, 20=0.01%, 50=0.01%, 100=0.01%, >>>>>> 250=20.79% lat (usec) : 500=32.74%, 750=8.99%, 1000=5.03% lat (msec) : >>>>>> 2=8.37%, 4=6.21%, 10=8.90%, 20=6.60%, 50=2.37% lat (msec) : 100=0.01% >>>>>> cpu : usr=15.90%, sys=3.01%, ctx=765446, majf=0, minf=8710 IO depths : >>>>>> 1=0.4%, 2=0.9%, 4=2.3%, 8=7.4%, 16=75.5%, 32=13.6%, >=64=0.0% submit : >>>>>> 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% >>>>>> complete : 0=0.0%, 4=93.6%, 8=2.8%, 16=2.4%, 32=1.2%, 64=0.0%, >>>>>>> =64=0.0% issued : total=r=2958935/w=0/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0, >>>>>> drop=r=0/w=0/d=0 latency : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, >>>>>> depth=32 >>>>>> >>>>>> Run status group 0 (all jobs): >>>>>> READ: io=11558MB, aggrb=451487KB/s, minb=451487KB/s, maxb=451487KB/s, >>>>>> mint=26215msec, maxt=26215msec >>>>>> >>>>>> Disk stats (read/write): >>>>>> sdg: ios=0/29, merge=0/16, ticks=0/3, in_queue=3, util=0.01% >>>>>> [root@ceph1-3 fiorbd]# ./fio fiorbd >>>>>> rbd_iodepth32-test: (g=0): rw=randread, bs=4K-4K/4K-4K/4K-4K, >>>>>> ioengine=rbd, iodepth=32 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> AFTER RESTARTING OSDS >>>>>> ---------------------- >>>>>> [root@ceph1-3 fiorbd]# ./fio fiorbd >>>>>> rbd_iodepth32-test: (g=0): rw=randread, bs=4K-4K/4K-4K/4K-4K, >>>>>> ioengine=rbd, iodepth=32 ... >>>>>> fio-2.2.7-10-g51e9 >>>>>> Starting 10 processes >>>>>> rbd engine: RBD version: 0.1.9 >>>>>> rbd engine: RBD version: 0.1.9 >>>>>> rbd engine: RBD version: 0.1.9 >>>>>> rbd engine: RBD version: 0.1.9 >>>>>> rbd engine: RBD version: 0.1.9 >>>>>> rbd engine: RBD version: 0.1.9 >>>>>> rbd engine: RBD version: 0.1.9 >>>>>> rbd engine: RBD version: 0.1.9 >>>>>> rbd engine: RBD version: 0.1.9 >>>>>> rbd engine: RBD version: 0.1.9 >>>>>> ^Cbs: 10 (f=10): [r(10)] [0.2% done] [1155MB/0KB/0KB /s] [296K/0/0 >>>>>> iops] [eta 01h:09m:27s] >>>>>> fio: terminating on signal 2 >>>>>> >>>>>> rbd_iodepth32-test: (groupid=0, jobs=10): err= 0: pid=18252: Wed Apr >>>>>> 22 10:02:28 2015 read : io=7655.7MB, bw=1036.8MB/s, iops=265218, >>>>>> runt= 7389msec slat (usec): min=5, max=3406, avg=26.59, stdev=40.35 >>>>>> clat >>>>>> (usec): min=8, max=684328, avg=930.43, stdev=6419.12 lat (usec): >>>>>> min=154, max=684342, avg=957.02, stdev=6419.28 clat percentiles >>>>>> (usec): >>>>>> | 1.00th=[ 243], 5.00th=[ 314], 10.00th=[ 366], 20.00th=[ 450], >>>>>> | 30.00th=[ 524], 40.00th=[ 604], 50.00th=[ 692], 60.00th=[ 796], >>>>>> | 70.00th=[ 924], 80.00th=[ 1096], 90.00th=[ 1400], 95.00th=[ 1720], >>>>>> | 99.00th=[ 2672], 99.50th=[ 3248], 99.90th=[ 5920], 99.95th=[ 9792], >>>>>> | 99.99th=[436224] >>>>>> bw (KB /s): min=32614, max=143160, per=10.19%, avg=108076.46, >>>>>> stdev=28263.82 lat (usec) : 10=0.01%, 20=0.01%, 50=0.01%, 100=0.01%, >>>>>> 250=1.23% lat (usec) : 500=25.64%, 750=29.15%, 1000=18.84% lat (msec) >>>>>> : 2=22.19%, 4=2.69%, 10=0.21%, 20=0.02%, 50=0.01% lat (msec) : >>>>>> 250=0.01%, 500=0.02%, 750=0.01% cpu : usr=44.06%, sys=11.26%, >>>>>> ctx=642620, majf=0, minf=6832 IO depths : 1=0.1%, 2=0.5%, 4=2.0%, >>>>>> 8=11.5%, 16=77.8%, 32=8.1%, >=64=0.0% submit : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, >>>>>> 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% complete : 0=0.0%, >>>>>> 4=94.1%, 8=1.3%, 16=2.3%, 32=2.3%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% issued : >>>>>> total=r=1959697/w=0/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0, drop=r=0/w=0/d=0 latency : >>>>>> target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=32 >>>>>> >>>>>> Run status group 0 (all jobs): >>>>>> READ: io=7655.7MB, aggrb=1036.8MB/s, minb=1036.8MB/s, >>>>>> maxb=1036.8MB/s, mint=7389msec, maxt=7389msec >>>>>> >>>>>> Disk stats (read/write): >>>>>> sdg: ios=0/21, merge=0/10, ticks=0/2, in_queue=2, util=0.03% >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> CEPH LOG >>>>>> -------- >>>>>> >>>>>> before restarting osd >>>>>> ---------------------- >>>>>> >>>>>> 2015-04-22 09:53:17.568095 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2144 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11330: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 390 GB data, 391 GB used, 904 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 298 MB/s rd, 76465 op/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 09:53:18.574524 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2145 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11331: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 390 GB data, 391 GB used, 904 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 333 MB/s rd, 85355 op/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 09:53:19.579351 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2146 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11332: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 390 GB data, 391 GB used, 904 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 343 MB/s rd, 87932 op/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 09:53:20.591586 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2147 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11333: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 390 GB data, 391 GB used, 904 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 328 MB/s rd, 84151 op/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 09:53:21.600650 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2148 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11334: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 390 GB data, 391 GB used, 904 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 237 MB/s rd, 60855 op/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 09:53:22.607966 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2149 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11335: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 390 GB data, 391 GB used, 904 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 144 MB/s rd, 36935 op/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 09:53:23.617780 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2150 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11336: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 390 GB data, 391 GB used, 904 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 321 MB/s rd, 82334 op/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 09:53:24.622341 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2151 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11337: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 390 GB data, 391 GB used, 904 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 368 MB/s rd, 94211 op/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 09:53:25.628432 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2152 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11338: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 390 GB data, 391 GB used, 904 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 244 MB/s rd, 62644 op/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 09:53:26.632855 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2153 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11339: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 390 GB data, 391 GB used, 904 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 175 MB/s rd, 44997 op/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 09:53:27.636573 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2154 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11340: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 390 GB data, 391 GB used, 904 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 122 MB/s rd, 31259 op/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 09:53:28.645784 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2155 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11341: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 390 GB data, 391 GB used, 904 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 229 MB/s rd, 58674 op/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 09:53:29.657128 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2156 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11342: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 390 GB data, 391 GB used, 904 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 271 MB/s rd, 69501 op/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 09:53:30.662796 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2157 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11343: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 390 GB data, 391 GB used, 904 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 211 MB/s rd, 54020 op/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 09:53:31.666421 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2158 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11344: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 390 GB data, 391 GB used, 904 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 164 MB/s rd, 42001 op/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 09:53:32.670842 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2159 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11345: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 390 GB data, 391 GB used, 904 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 134 MB/s rd, 34380 op/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 09:53:33.681357 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2160 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11346: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 390 GB data, 391 GB used, 904 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 293 MB/s rd, 75213 op/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 09:53:34.692177 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2161 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11347: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 390 GB data, 391 GB used, 904 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 337 MB/s rd, 86353 op/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 09:53:35.697401 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2162 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11348: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 390 GB data, 391 GB used, 904 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 229 MB/s rd, 58839 op/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 09:53:36.699309 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2163 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11349: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 390 GB data, 391 GB used, 904 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 152 MB/s rd, 39117 op/s >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> restarting osd >>>>>> --------------- >>>>>> >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:09.766906 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2255 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osd.0 marked itself down >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:09.790212 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2256 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osdmap e849: 9 osds: 8 up, 9 in >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:09.793050 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2257 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11439: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 8 >>>>>> stale+active+remapped, 106 stale+active+clean, 54 active+remapped, >>>>>> stale+active+794 >>>>>> active+clean; 419 GB data, 420 GB used, 874 GB / 1295 GB avail; 516 >>>>>> kB/s rd, 130 op/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:10.795966 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2258 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osdmap e850: 9 osds: 8 up, 9 in >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:10.796675 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2259 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11440: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 8 >>>>>> stale+active+remapped, 106 stale+active+clean, 54 active+remapped, >>>>>> stale+active+794 >>>>>> active+clean; 419 GB data, 420 GB used, 874 GB / 1295 GB avail >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:11.798257 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2260 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11441: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 8 >>>>>> stale+active+remapped, 106 stale+active+clean, 54 active+remapped, >>>>>> stale+active+794 >>>>>> active+clean; 419 GB data, 420 GB used, 874 GB / 1295 GB avail >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:12.339696 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2262 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osd.1 marked itself down >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:12.800168 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2263 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osdmap e851: 9 osds: 7 up, 9 in >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:12.806498 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2264 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11443: 964 pgs: 1 active+undersized+degraded, 13 >>>>>> stale+active+remapped, 216 stale+active+clean, 49 active+remapped, >>>>>> stale+active+684 >>>>>> active+clean, 1 stale+active+undersized+degraded; 419 GB data, 420 GB >>>>>> used, 874 GB / 1295 GB avail >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:13.804186 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2265 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osdmap e852: 9 osds: 7 up, 9 in >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:13.805216 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2266 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11444: 964 pgs: 1 active+undersized+degraded, 13 >>>>>> stale+active+remapped, 216 stale+active+clean, 49 active+remapped, >>>>>> stale+active+684 >>>>>> active+clean, 1 stale+active+undersized+degraded; 419 GB data, 420 GB >>>>>> used, 874 GB / 1295 GB avail >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:14.781785 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2268 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osd.2 marked itself down >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:14.810571 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2269 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osdmap e853: 9 osds: 6 up, 9 in >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:14.813871 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2270 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11445: 964 pgs: 1 active+undersized+degraded, 22 >>>>>> stale+active+remapped, 300 stale+active+clean, 40 active+remapped, >>>>>> stale+active+600 >>>>>> active+clean, 1 stale+active+undersized+degraded; 419 GB data, 420 GB >>>>>> used, 874 GB / 1295 GB avail >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:15.810333 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2271 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osdmap e854: 9 osds: 6 up, 9 in >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:15.811425 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2272 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11446: 964 pgs: 1 active+undersized+degraded, 22 >>>>>> stale+active+remapped, 300 stale+active+clean, 40 active+remapped, >>>>>> stale+active+600 >>>>>> active+clean, 1 stale+active+undersized+degraded; 419 GB data, 420 GB >>>>>> used, 874 GB / 1295 GB avail >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:16.395105 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2273 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] HEALTH_WARN; 2 pgs degraded; 323 pgs stale; 2 pgs stuck >>>>>> degraded; 64 pgs stuck unclean; 2 pgs stuck undersized; 2 pgs >>>>>> undersized; 3/9 in osds are down; clock skew detected on mon.ceph1-2 >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:16.814432 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2274 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osd.1 10.7.0.152:6800/14848 boot >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:16.814938 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2275 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osdmap e855: 9 osds: 7 up, 9 in >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:16.815942 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2276 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11447: 964 pgs: 1 active+undersized+degraded, 22 >>>>>> stale+active+remapped, 300 stale+active+clean, 40 active+remapped, >>>>>> stale+active+600 >>>>>> active+clean, 1 stale+active+undersized+degraded; 419 GB data, 420 GB >>>>>> used, 874 GB / 1295 GB avail >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:17.222281 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2278 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osd.3 marked itself down >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:17.819371 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2279 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osdmap e856: 9 osds: 6 up, 9 in >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:17.822041 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2280 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11448: 964 pgs: 1 active+undersized+degraded, 25 >>>>>> stale+active+remapped, 394 stale+active+clean, 37 active+remapped, >>>>>> stale+active+506 >>>>>> active+clean, 1 stale+active+undersized+degraded; 419 GB data, 420 GB >>>>>> used, 874 GB / 1295 GB avail >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:18.551068 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2282 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osd.6 marked itself down >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:18.819387 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2283 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osd.2 10.7.0.152:6812/15410 boot >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:18.821134 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2284 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osdmap e857: 9 osds: 6 up, 9 in >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:18.824440 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2285 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11449: 964 pgs: 1 active+undersized+degraded, 30 >>>>>> stale+active+remapped, 502 stale+active+clean, 32 active+remapped, >>>>>> stale+active+398 >>>>>> active+clean, 1 stale+active+undersized+degraded; 419 GB data, 420 GB >>>>>> used, 874 GB / 1295 GB avail >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:19.820947 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2287 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osdmap e858: 9 osds: 6 up, 9 in >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:19.821853 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2288 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11450: 964 pgs: 1 active+undersized+degraded, 30 >>>>>> stale+active+remapped, 502 stale+active+clean, 32 active+remapped, >>>>>> stale+active+398 >>>>>> active+clean, 1 stale+active+undersized+degraded; 419 GB data, 420 GB >>>>>> used, 874 GB / 1295 GB avail >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:20.828047 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2290 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osd.3 10.7.0.152:6816/15971 boot >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:20.828431 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2291 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osdmap e859: 9 osds: 7 up, 9 in >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:20.829126 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2292 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11451: 964 pgs: 1 active+undersized+degraded, 30 >>>>>> stale+active+remapped, 502 stale+active+clean, 32 active+remapped, >>>>>> stale+active+398 >>>>>> active+clean, 1 stale+active+undersized+degraded; 419 GB data, 420 GB >>>>>> used, 874 GB / 1295 GB avail >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:20.991343 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2294 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osd.7 marked itself down >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:21.830389 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2295 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osd.0 10.7.0.152:6804/14481 boot >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:21.832518 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2296 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osdmap e860: 9 osds: 7 up, 9 in >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:21.836129 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2297 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11452: 964 pgs: 1 active+undersized+degraded, 35 >>>>>> stale+active+remapped, 608 stale+active+clean, 27 active+remapped, >>>>>> stale+active+292 >>>>>> active+clean, 1 stale+active+undersized+degraded; 419 GB data, 420 GB >>>>>> used, 874 GB / 1295 GB avail >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:22.830456 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2298 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osd.6 10.7.0.153:6808/21955 boot >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:22.832171 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2299 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osdmap e861: 9 osds: 8 up, 9 in >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:22.836272 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2300 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11453: 964 pgs: 3 active+undersized+degraded, 27 >>>>>> stale+active+remapped, 498 stale+active+clean, 2 peering, 28 >>>>>> active+remapped, 402 active+clean, 4 remapped+peering; 419 GB data, >>>>>> 420 GB used, 874 GB / 1295 GB avail >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:23.420309 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2302 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osd.8 marked itself down >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:23.833708 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2303 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osdmap e862: 9 osds: 7 up, 9 in >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:23.836459 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2304 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11454: 964 pgs: 3 active+undersized+degraded, 44 >>>>>> stale+active+remapped, 587 stale+active+clean, 2 peering, 11 >>>>>> active+remapped, 313 active+clean, 4 remapped+peering; 419 GB data, >>>>>> 420 GB used, 874 GB / 1295 GB avail >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:24.832905 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2305 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osd.7 10.7.0.153:6804/22536 boot >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:24.834381 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2306 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osdmap e863: 9 osds: 8 up, 9 in >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:24.836977 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2307 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11455: 964 pgs: 3 active+undersized+degraded, 31 >>>>>> stale+active+remapped, 503 stale+active+clean, 4 >>>>>> active+undersized+degraded+remapped, 5 peering, 13 active+remapped, >>>>>> 397 active+clean, 8 remapped+peering; 419 GB data, 420 GB used, 874 >>>>>> GB / 1295 GB avail >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:25.834459 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2309 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] osdmap e864: 9 osds: 8 up, 9 in >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:00:25.835727 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2310 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11456: 964 pgs: 3 active+undersized+degraded, 31 >>>>>> stale+active+remapped, 503 stale+active+clean, 4 >>>>>> active+undersized+degraded+remapped, 5 peering, 13 active >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> AFTER OSD RESTART >>>>>> ------------------ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:09:27.609052 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2339 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11478: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 419 GB data, 421 GB used, 874 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 786 MB/s rd, 196 kop/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:09:28.618082 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2340 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11479: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 419 GB data, 421 GB used, 874 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 1578 MB/s rd, 394 kop/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:09:30.629067 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2341 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11480: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 419 GB data, 421 GB used, 874 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 932 MB/s rd, 233 kop/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:09:32.645890 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2342 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11481: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 419 GB data, 421 GB used, 874 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 627 MB/s rd, 156 kop/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:09:33.652634 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2343 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11482: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 419 GB data, 421 GB used, 874 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 1034 MB/s rd, 258 kop/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:09:35.655657 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2344 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11483: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 419 GB data, 421 GB used, 874 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 529 MB/s rd, 132 kop/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:09:37.674332 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2345 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11484: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 419 GB data, 421 GB used, 874 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 770 MB/s rd, 192 kop/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:09:38.679445 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2346 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11485: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 419 GB data, 421 GB used, 874 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 1358 MB/s rd, 339 kop/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:09:40.690037 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2347 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11486: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 419 GB data, 421 GB used, 874 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 649 MB/s rd, 162 kop/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:09:42.707164 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2348 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11487: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 419 GB data, 421 GB used, 874 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 580 MB/s rd, 145 kop/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:09:43.713736 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2349 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11488: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 419 GB data, 421 GB used, 874 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 962 MB/s rd, 240 kop/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:09:45.718658 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2350 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11489: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 419 GB data, 421 GB used, 874 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 506 MB/s rd, 126 kop/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:09:47.737358 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2351 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11490: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 419 GB data, 421 GB used, 874 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 774 MB/s rd, 193 kop/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:09:48.743338 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2352 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11491: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 419 GB data, 421 GB used, 874 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 1363 MB/s rd, 340 kop/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:09:50.746685 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2353 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11492: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 419 GB data, 421 GB used, 874 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 662 MB/s rd, 165 kop/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:09:52.762461 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2354 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11493: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 419 GB data, 421 GB used, 874 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 593 MB/s rd, 148 kop/s >>>>>> 2015-04-22 10:09:53.767729 mon.0 10.7.0.152:6789/0 2355 : cluster >>>>>> [INF] pgmap v11494: 964 pgs: 2 active+undersized+degraded, 62 >>>>>> active+remapped, 900 active+clean; 419 GB data, 421 GB used, 874 GB / >>>>>> 1295 GB avail; 938 MB/s rd, 234 kop/s >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> ceph-users mailing list >>>>>> ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> ceph-users mailing list >>>>> ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com >>>>> >>>>> ________________________________ >>>>> >>>>> PLEASE NOTE: The information contained in this electronic mail >>>>> message is intended only for the use of the designated recipient(s) >>>>> named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended >>>>> recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this >>>>> message in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or >>>>> copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received >>>>> this communication in error, please notify the sender by telephone or >>>>> e-mail (as shown above) immediately and destroy any and all copies of >>>>> this message in your possession (whether hard copies or >>>>> electronically stored copies). >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> ceph-users mailing list >>>>> ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> ceph-users mailing list >>>>> ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> ceph-users mailing list >>>> ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> ceph-users mailing list >>>> ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> С уважением, Фасихов Ирек Нургаязович >>>> Моб.: +79229045757 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in >>>> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>> <mailto:majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ceph-users mailing list >> ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ceph-users mailing list >> ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com >> >> >> >> -- >> 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 >> _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |