Am 17.04.2018 um 17:34 schrieb Paul Emmerich: > > > 2018-04-16 18:24 GMT+02:00 Oliver Freyermuth <freyermuth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:freyermuth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>: > > Hi Paul, > > Am 16.04.2018 um 17:51 schrieb Paul Emmerich: > > Hi, > > > > can you try to get a stack trace from ganesha (with gdb or from procfs) when it's stuck? > > I can try, as soon as it happens again. The problem is that it's not fully stuck - only the other clients are stuck when trying to access the directory in question, > since it seems the Ganesha server holds a lock and never gives it back. Not sure if a backtrace can shed much light on this. > It seems the NFS server itself is completely happy all the time, it only gets problems when I want to stop / restart it. > > > Oh, I assumed the whole process got stuck because you mentioned it not terminating on SIGTERM. But then it just doesn't handle stuck requests gracefully there. Yes, sorry, my statement was unclear - this only happened when I actually wanted to issue: systemctl stop nfs-ganesha Only then, nfs-ganesha did hang - before, it was running and just not relinquishing the lock. > [...] > > We are right now using the packages from https://eu.ceph.com/nfs-ganesha/ <https://eu.ceph.com/nfs-ganesha/> since we would like not to have to build NFS Ganesha against Ceph ourselves, > but would love to just follow upstream to save the maintenance burden. Are you building packages yourself, or using a repo maintained upstream? > > > We are building it ourselves. We plan to soon publish our own repository for it. This is certainly interesting for us! Ideally, we would love something with a similar maintenance-promise as the eu.ceph.com repositories, always in sync with upstream's ceph releases. I still hope NFS Ganesha will play a larger role in Mimic and later releases any maybe become a more integral part of the Ceph ecosystem. This is also the main problem preventing it from building it ourselves - if we had to do it, we would have to build Ceph and NFS Ganesha, e.g. on the Open Build Service, and closely monitor upstream ourselves. Many thanks and looking forward towards the publishing of your repo, Oliver > > > Paul > > > > I see there have been some locking fixes upstream: > https://github.com/nfs-ganesha/nfs-ganesha/search?q=ceph+lock&type=Commits <https://github.com/nfs-ganesha/nfs-ganesha/search?q=ceph+lock&type=Commits> > but I'm not expert enough to deduce whether they apply to our observation. > > Cheers and thanks, > Oliver > > > > > Paul > > > > 2018-04-16 17:30 GMT+02:00 Oliver Freyermuth <freyermuth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:freyermuth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <mailto:freyermuth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:freyermuth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>>: > > > > Am 16.04.2018 um 08:58 schrieb Oliver Freyermuth: > > > Am 16.04.2018 um 02:43 schrieb Oliver Freyermuth: > > >> Am 15.04.2018 um 23:04 schrieb John Spray: > > >>> On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 5:16 PM, Oliver Freyermuth > > >>> <freyermuth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:freyermuth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <mailto:freyermuth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:freyermuth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>> wrote: > > >>>> Dear Cephalopodians, > > >>>> > > >>>> in our cluster (CentOS 7.4, EC Pool, Snappy compression, Luminous 12.2.4), > > >>>> we often have all (~40) clients accessing one file in readonly mode, even with multiple processes per client doing that. > > >>>> > > >>>> Sometimes (I do not yet know when, nor why!) the MDS ends up in a situation like: > > >>>> ----------------------------------------------------------- > > >>>> 2018-04-13 18:08:34.378888 7f1ce4472700 0 log_channel(cluster) log [WRN] : 292 slow requests, 5 included below; oldest blocked for > 1745.864417 secs > > >>>> 2018-04-13 18:08:34.378900 7f1ce4472700 0 log_channel(cluster) log [WRN] : slow request 960.563534 seconds old, received at 2018-04-13 17:52:33.815273: client_request(client.34720:16487379 getattr pAsLsXsFs #0x1000009ff6d 2018-04-13 17:52:33.814904 caller_uid=94894, caller_gid=513{513,}) currently failed to rdlock, waiting > > >>>> 2018-04-13 18:08:34.378904 7f1ce4472700 0 log_channel(cluster) log [WRN] : slow request 30.636678 seconds old, received at 2018-04-13 18:08:03.742128: client_request(client.34302:16453640 getattr pAsLsXsFs #0x1000009ff6d 2018-04-13 18:08:03.741630 caller_uid=94894, caller_gid=513{513,}) currently failed to rdlock, waiting > > >>>> 2018-04-13 18:08:34.378908 7f1ce4472700 0 log_channel(cluster) log [WRN] : slow request 972.648926 seconds old, received at 2018-04-13 17:52:21.729881: client_request(client.34720:16487334 lookup #0x1000001fcab/sometarball.tar.gz 2018-04-13 17:52:21.729450 caller_uid=94894, caller_gid=513{513,}) currently failed to rdlock, waiting > > >>>> 2018-04-13 18:08:34.378913 7f1ce4472700 0 log_channel(cluster) log [WRN] : slow request 1685.953657 seconds old, received at 2018-04-13 17:40:28.425149: client_request(client.34810:16564864 lookup #0x1000001fcab/sometarball.tar.gz 2018-04-13 17:40:28.424961 caller_uid=94894, caller_gid=513{513,}) currently failed to rdlock, waiting > > >>>> 2018-04-13 18:08:34.378918 7f1ce4472700 0 log_channel(cluster) log [WRN] : slow request 1552.743795 seconds old, received at 2018-04-13 17:42:41.635012: client_request(client.34302:16453566 getattr pAsLsXsFs #0x1000009ff6d 2018-04-13 17:42:41.634726 caller_uid=94894, caller_gid=513{513,}) currently failed to rdlock, waiting > > >>>> ----------------------------------------------------------- > > >>>> As you can see (oldest blocked for > 1745.864417 secs) it stays in that situation for quite a while. > > >>>> The number of blocked requests is also not decreasing, but instead slowly increasing whenever a new request is added to the queue. > > >>>> > > >>>> We have a setup of one active MDS, a standby-replay, and a standby. > > >>>> Triggering a failover does not help, it only resets the "oldest blocked" time. > > >>> > > >>> Sounds like a client issue (a client is holding a lock on a file but > > >>> failing to relinquish it for another client's request to be > > >>> processed). > > >>> > > >>> Are these kernel (and what version?) or fuse clients? > > >> > > >> The full cluster is running with Fuse clients, all on 12.2.4. > > >> Additionally, there are 6 NFS Ganesha servers using FSAL_CEPH, i.e. libcephfs. > > >> > > >> Cheers, > > >> Oliver > > > > > > Related to that: In case it happens again, which it surely will sooner or later, how can I diagnose > > > which client is holding a lock and not relinquishing it? > > > Is there a way to dump all held locks, ideally with the time period how long they were held? > > > > > > ceph daemon mds.XXX help > > > does not yield anything obvious. > > > > > > Cheers and thanks, > > > Oliver > > > > It happened again - and I managed to track down the client causing it: > > Dumping all operations in progress on the MDS, and looking for machines without operations which were waiting for an rdlock, > > one NFS Ganesha server was not affected. > > Unmounting the NFS share on the clients did not have any effect - things stayed in "stuck" state. > > > > I then stopped the NFS Ganesha server. This took quite a while, until systemd noticed it's taking too long, and force-killed the server. > > Shortly after, even before the NFS Ganesha libchepfs client was evicted, the MDS got unstuck, processed all requests within about 2 seconds, and everything was fine again. > > > > After that, the dead NFS Ganesha client was evicted, and I just restarted the NFS Ganesha server. > > > > Since this appears to be reproducible (even though we still do not know how exactly), this is a rather ugly issue. It seems NFS Ganesha with libcephfs is holding locks > > and not returning them. We are using the packages from: > > https://eu.ceph.com/nfs-ganesha/ <https://eu.ceph.com/nfs-ganesha/> <https://eu.ceph.com/nfs-ganesha/ <https://eu.ceph.com/nfs-ganesha/>> > > Newer versions are available upstream, but I don't know if they fix this critial issue. > > > > Is there somebody else with experience on that? > > > > As far as I can reproduce, the I/O pattern is: > > 1. Machine with NFS-mount checks datafolder/sometarball.tar.gz exists. > > 2. Machines in the cluster (with ceph-fuse) all access datafolder/sometarball.tar.gz (and extract it to a local filesystem) > > > > (1) may happen several times while (2) is going on, and it seems this somehow causes the NFS-server to (sometimes?) keep a persistent lock which is never relinquished. > > > > Any help appreciated! > > Oliver > > > > > > > > > >> > > >>> > > >>> John > > >>> > > >>>> > > >>>> I checked the following things on the active MDS: > > >>>> ----------------------------------------------------------- > > >>>> # ceph daemon mds.mon001 objecter_requests > > >>>> { > > >>>> "ops": [], > > >>>> "linger_ops": [], > > >>>> "pool_ops": [], > > >>>> "pool_stat_ops": [], > > >>>> "statfs_ops": [], > > >>>> "command_ops": [] > > >>>> } > > >>>> # ceph daemon mds.mon001 ops | grep event | grep -v "initiated" | grep -v "failed to rdlock" | grep -v events > > >>>> => no output, only "initiated" and "rdlock" are in the queue. > > >>>> ----------------------------------------------------------- > > >>>> > > >>>> There's also almost no CPU load, almost no other I/O, and ceph is deep-scrubbing ~pg (this also finishes and the next pg is scrubbed fine), > > >>>> and the scrubbing is not even happening in the metadata pool (easy to see in the Luminous dashboard): > > >>>> ----------------------------------------------------------- > > >>>> # ceph -s > > >>>> cluster: > > >>>> id: some_funny_hash > > >>>> health: HEALTH_WARN > > >>>> 1 MDSs report slow requests > > >>>> > > >>>> services: > > >>>> mon: 3 daemons, quorum mon003,mon001,mon002 > > >>>> mgr: mon001(active), standbys: mon002, mon003 > > >>>> mds: cephfs_baf-1/1/1 up {0=mon001=up:active}, 1 up:standby-replay, 1 up:standby > > >>>> osd: 196 osds: 196 up, 196 in > > >>>> > > >>>> data: > > >>>> pools: 2 pools, 4224 pgs > > >>>> objects: 15649k objects, 61761 GB > > >>>> usage: 114 TB used, 586 TB / 700 TB avail > > >>>> pgs: 4223 active+clean > > >>>> 1 active+clean+scrubbing+deep > > >>>> > > >>>> io: > > >>>> client: 175 kB/s rd, 3 op/s rd, 0 op/s wr > > >>>> ----------------------------------------------------------- > > >>>> > > >>>> Does anybody have any idea what's going on here? > > >>>> > > >>>> Yesterday, this also happened, but resolved itself after about 1 hour. > > >>>> Right now, it's going on for about half an hour... > > >>>> > > >>>> Cheers, > > >>>> Oliver > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> _______________________________________________ > > >>>> ceph-users mailing list > > >>>> ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> > > >>>> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com <http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com> <http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com <http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com>> > > >>>> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> ceph-users mailing list > > >> ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> > > >> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com <http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com> <http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com <http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com>> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > ceph-users mailing list > > ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> > > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com <http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com> <http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com <http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com>> > > > > > > > > > > -- > > -- > > Paul Emmerich > > > > croit GmbH > > Freseniusstr. 31h > > 81247 München > > www.croit.io <http://www.croit.io> <http://www.croit.io> > > Tel: +49 89 1896585 90 > > > > > > -- > -- > Paul Emmerich > > croit GmbH > Freseniusstr. 31h > 81247 München > www.croit.io <http://www.croit.io> > Tel: +49 89 1896585 90
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
