Dan, Lukas, Thomas, Internally io-cache limits the cache size to 120% of what is configured in the spec file. If you say 2GB, memory usage can go up to 2.4-2.5 GB. This is creating confusion, we will make the necessary change. Can you guys check if the memory usage goes beyond the 120% limit and keeps increasing? Dan, can you see if the memory usage can go to 3GB? It will be easier for you to configure cache-size as 512MB and see if glusterfs usage grows to 1GB. Thanks Krishna On Sat, Nov 8, 2008 at 1:12 AM, Dan Parsons <dparsons@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > To be fair, I'm not even sure it's technically a "leak", it's just io-cache > not limiting itself to the cache-size setting. As in, io-cache is doing its > job, it's just doing it a bit .. too enthusiastically. > > First, here's my io-cache block: > > volume ioc > type performance/io-cache > subvolumes stripe0 # In this example it is 'client' you may have to > change it according to your spec file. > option page-size 1MB # 128KB is default > option cache-size 2048MB # 32MB is default > option force-revalidate-timeout 5 # 1second is default > option priority *.psiblast:3,*.seq:2,*:1 > end-volume > > And for my test: > > [root@cpu26 ~]# cd /distfs > [root@cpu26 distfs]# ls -lah bigfile.img > -rw-r--r-- 1 root employees 6.3G Aug 26 00:21 bigfile.img > > Note the memory usage of a freshly started glusterfs client: > root 23972 0.0 0.0 110340 1540 ? Ssl 11:37 0:00 [glusterfs] > > Now I do this: > [root@cpu26 distfs]# cat bigfile.img > /dev/null > > The glusterfs memory footprint grows at a nice rate. In just a few seconds > it's gone from 110kb to 2.5GB, way past my cache-size limit. > > root 23972 9.4 61.8 2590552 2503164 ? Ssl 11:37 0:14 [glusterfs] > > This box has only 4GB RAM so i killed the 'cat' process before things got > out of hand. But, there's your test. > > [root@cpu26 ~]# glusterfs --version > glusterfs 1.3.11 built on Aug 21 2008 11:26:38 > Repository revision: glusterfs--mainline--2.5--patch-795 > > > Dan Parsons > > > On Nov 7, 2008, at 11:31 AM, Krishna Srinivas wrote: > >> Lukas, Dan, >> >> Are you sure that its a leak of io-cache? did you try by removing the >> translator and not observe the leak? >> >> What made you conclude that cache-size option was being ignored? It >> could be a memory leak by io-cache at some other place too. >> >> I tried to make io-cache memleak, but its not happening, what >> operations do you guys do to see the leak? can you see if some simple >> test case makes it leak? (so that it will be easy for me to reproduce >> the bug here and fix it) >> >> Thanks! >> Krishna >> >> On
