Please take a look at updated test results.
Test: find /mnt/volume -type d
RAM usage after "find" finishes: ~ 10.8G (see "ps" output [1]).
Statedump after "find" finishes: [2].
Then I did drop_caches, and RAM usage dropped to ~4.7G [3].
Statedump after drop_caches: [4].
Here is diff between statedumps: [5].
And, finally, Valgrind output: [6].
Definitely, no major leaks on exit, but why glusterfs process uses almost 5G
of RAM after drop_caches? Examining statedump shows only the following snippet
with high "size" value:
===
[mount/fuse.fuse - usage-type gf_fuse_mt_iov_base memusage]
size=4234592647
num_allocs=1
max_size=4294935223
max_num_allocs=3
total_allocs=4186991
===
Another leak?
Grepping "gf_fuse_mt_iov_base" on GlusterFS source tree shows the following:
===
$ grep -Rn gf_fuse_mt_iov_base
xlators/mount/fuse/src/fuse-mem-types.h:20: gf_fuse_mt_iov_base,
xlators/mount/fuse/src/fuse-bridge.c:4887:
gf_fuse_mt_iov_base);
===
fuse-bridge.c snippet:
===
/* Add extra 128 byte to the first iov so that it can
* accommodate "ordinary" non-write requests. It's not
* guaranteed to be big enough, as SETXATTR and namespace
* operations with very long names may grow behind it,
* but it's good enough in most cases (and we can handle
* rest via realloc).
*/
iov_in[0].iov_base = GF_CALLOC (1, msg0_size,
gf_fuse_mt_iov_base);
===
Probably, some freeing missing for iov_base?
[1] https://gist.github.com/f0cf98e8bff0c13ea38f
[2] https://gist.github.com/87baa0a778ba54f0f7f7
[3] https://gist.github.com/7013b493d19c8c5fffae
[4] https://gist.github.com/cc38155b57e68d7e86d5
[5] https://gist.github.com/6a24000c77760a97976a
[6] https://gist.github.com/74bd7a9f734c2fd21c33
On понеділок, 1 лютого 2016 р. 14:24:22 EET Soumya Koduri wrote:
> On 02/01/2016 01:39 PM, Oleksandr Natalenko wrote:
> > Wait. It seems to be my bad.
> >
> > Before unmounting I do drop_caches (2), and glusterfs process CPU usage
> > goes to 100% for a while. I haven't waited for it to drop to 0%, and
> > instead perform unmount. It seems glusterfs is purging inodes and that's
> > why it uses 100% of CPU. I've re-tested it, waiting for CPU usage to
> > become normal, and got no leaks.
> >
> > Will verify this once again and report more.
> >
> > BTW, if that works, how could I limit inode cache for FUSE client? I do
> > not want it to go beyond 1G, for example, even if I have 48G of RAM on
> > my server.
>
> Its hard-coded for now. For fuse the lru limit (of the inodes which are
> not active) is (32*1024).
> One of the ways to address this (which we were discussing earlier) is to
> have an option to configure inode cache limit. If that sounds good, we
> can then check on if it has to be global/volume-level, client/server/both.
>
> Thanks,
> Soumya
>
> > 01.02.2016 09:54, Soumya Koduri написав:
> >> On 01/31/2016 03:05 PM, Oleksandr Natalenko wrote:
> >>> Unfortunately, this patch doesn't help.
> >>>
> >>> RAM usage on "find" finish is ~9G.
> >>>
> >>> Here is statedump before drop_caches: https://gist.github.com/
> >>> fc1647de0982ab447e20
> >>
> >> [mount/fuse.fuse - usage-type gf_common_mt_inode_ctx memusage]
> >> size=706766688
> >> num_allocs=2454051
> >>
> >>> And after drop_caches: https://gist.github.com/5eab63bc13f78787ed19
> >>
> >> [mount/fuse.fuse - usage-type gf_common_mt_inode_ctx memusage]
> >> size=550996416
> >> num_allocs=1913182
> >>
> >> There isn't much significant drop in inode contexts. One of the
> >> reasons could be because of dentrys holding a refcount on the inodes
> >> which shall result in inodes not getting purged even after
> >> fuse_forget.
> >>
> >>
> >> pool-name=fuse:dentry_t
> >> hot-count=32761
> >>
> >> if '32761' is the current active dentry count, it still doesn't seem
> >> to match up to inode count.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Soumya
> >>
> >>> And here is Valgrind output:
> >>> https://gist.github.com/2490aeac448320d98596
> >>>
> >>> On субота, 30 січня 2016 р. 22:56:37 EET Xavier Hernandez wrote:
> >>>> There's another inode leak caused by an incorrect counting of
> >>>> lookups on directory reads.
> >>>>
> >>>> Here's a patch that solves the problem for
> >>>> 3.7:
> >>>>
> >>>> http://review.gluster.org/13324
> >>>>
> >>>> Hopefully with this patch the
> >>>> memory leaks should disapear.
> >>>>
> >>>> Xavi
> >>>>
> >>>> On 29.01.2016 19:09, Oleksandr
> >>>>
> >>>> Natalenko wrote:
> >>>>> Here is intermediate summary of current memory
> >>>>
> >>>> leaks in FUSE client
> >>>>
> >>>>> investigation.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I use GlusterFS v3.7.6
> >>>>
> >>>> release with the following patches:
> >>>>> ===
> >>>>
> >>>>> Kaleb S KEITHLEY (1):
> >>>> fuse: use-after-free fix in fuse-bridge, revisited
> >>>>
> >>>>> Pranith Kumar K
> >>>>
> >>>> (1):
> >>>>> mount/fuse: Fix use-after-free crash
> >>>>
> >>>>> Soumya Koduri (3):
> >>>> gfapi: Fix inode nlookup counts
> >>>>
> >>>>> inode: Retire the inodes from the lru
> >>>>
> >>>> list in inode_table_destroy
> >>>>
> >>>>> upcall: free the xdr* allocations
> >>>>> ===
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> With those patches we got API leaks fixed (I hope, brief tests show
> >>>>
> >>>> that) and
> >>>>
> >>>>> got rid of "kernel notifier loop terminated" message.
> >>>>
> >>>> Nevertheless, FUSE
> >>>>
> >>>>> client still leaks.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I have several test
> >>>>
> >>>> volumes with several million of small files (100K…2M in
> >>>>
> >>>>> average). I
> >>>>
> >>>> do 2 types of FUSE client testing:
> >>>>> 1) find /mnt/volume -type d
> >>>>> 2)
> >>>>
> >>>> rsync -av -H /mnt/source_volume/* /mnt/target_volume/
> >>>>
> >>>>> And most
> >>>>
> >>>> up-to-date results are shown below:
> >>>>> === find /mnt/volume -type d
> >>>>
> >>>> ===
> >>>>
> >>>>> Memory consumption: ~4G
> >>>>
> >>>>> Statedump:
> >>>> https://gist.github.com/10cde83c63f1b4f1dd7a
> >>>>
> >>>>> Valgrind:
> >>>> https://gist.github.com/097afb01ebb2c5e9e78d
> >>>>
> >>>>> I guess,
> >>>>
> >>>> fuse-bridge/fuse-resolve. related.
> >>>>
> >>>>> === rsync -av -H
> >>>>
> >>>> /mnt/source_volume/* /mnt/target_volume/ ===
> >>>>
> >>>>> Memory consumption:
> >>>> ~3.3...4G
> >>>>
> >>>>> Statedump (target volume):
> >>>> https://gist.github.com/31e43110eaa4da663435
> >>>>
> >>>>> Valgrind (target volume):
> >>>> https://gist.github.com/f8e0151a6878cacc9b1a
> >>>>
> >>>>> I guess,
> >>>>
> >>>> DHT-related.
> >>>>
> >>>>> Give me more patches to test :).
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>
> >>>>> Gluster-devel mailing
> >>>>
> >>>> list
> >>>>
> >>>>> Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>>
> >>>> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Gluster-devel mailing list
> >>> Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
