On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 12:26:51PM +0200, Zdenek Kabelac wrote:
> Dne 16. 08. 22 v 12:08 Heming Zhao napsal(a):
> > Ooh, very sorry, the subject is wrong, not IO performance but cpu high load
> > is triggered by pvmove.
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 11:38:52AM +0200, Zdenek Kabelac wrote:
> > > Dne 16. 08. 22 v 11:28 Heming Zhao napsal(a):
> > > > Hello maintainers & list,
> > > >
> > > > I bring a story:
> > > > One SUSE customer suffered lvmpolld issue, which cause IO performance dramatic
> > > > decrease.
> > > >
> > > > How to trigger:
> > > > When machine connects large number of LUNs (eg 80~200), pvmove (eg, move a single
> > > > disk to a new one, cmd like: pvmove disk1 disk2), the system will suffer high
> > > > cpu load. But when system connects ~10 LUNs, the performance is fine.
> > > >
> > > > We found two work arounds:
> > > > 1. set lvm.conf 'activation/polling_interval=120'.
> > > > 2. write a speical udev rule, which make udev ignore the event for mpath devices.
> > > > echo 'ENV{DM_UUID}=="mpath-*", OPTIONS+="nowatch"' >\
> > > > /etc/udev/rules.d/90-dm-watch.rules
> > > >
> > > > Run above any one of two can make the performance issue disappear.
> > > >
> > > > ** the root cause **
> > > >
> > > > lvmpolld will do interval requeset info job for updating the pvmove status
> > > >
> > > > On every polling_interval time, lvm2 will update vg metadata. The update job will
> > > > call sys_close, which will trigger systemd-udevd IN_CLOSE_WRITE event, eg:
> > > > 2022-<time>-xxx <hostname> systemd-udevd[pid]: dm-179: Inotify event: 8 for /dev/dm-179
> > > > (8 is IN_CLOSE_WRITE.)
> > > >
> > > > These VGs underlying devices are multipath devices. So when lvm2 update metatdata,
> > > > even if pvmove write a few data, the sys_close action trigger udev's "watch"
> > > > mechanism to gets notified frequently about a process that has written to the
> > > > device and closed it. This causes frequent, pointless re-evaluation of the udev
> > > > rules for these devices.
> > > >
> > > > My question: Does LVM2 maintainers have any idea to fix this bug?
> > > >
> > > > In my view, does lvm2 could drop VGs devices fds until pvmove finish?
> > >
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > Please provide more info about lvm2 metadata and also some 'lvs -avvvvv'
> > > trace so we can get better picture about the layout - also version of
> > > lvm2,systemd,kernel in use.
> > >
> > > pvmove is progressing by mirroring each segment of an LV - so if there would
> > > be a lot of segments - then each such update may trigger udev watch rule
> > > event.
> > >
> > > But ATM I could hardly imagine how this could cause some 'dramatic'
> > > performance decrease - maybe there is something wrong with udev rules on
> > > the system ?
> > >
> > > What is the actual impact ?
> > >
> > > Note - pvmove was never designed as a high performance operation (in fact it
> > > tries to not eat all the disk bandwidth as such)
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Zdenek
> >
> > My mistake, I write here again:
> > The subject is wrong, not IO performance but cpu high load is triggered by pvmove.
> >
> > There is no IO performance issue.
> >
> > When system is connecting 80~200, the cpu load increase by 15~20, the
> > cpu usage by ~20%, which corresponds to about ~5,6 cores and led at
> > times to the cores fully utilized.
> > In another word: a single pvmove process cost 5-6 (sometime 10) cores
> > utilization. It's abnormal & unaccepted.
> >
> > The lvm2 is 2.03.05, kernel is 5.3. systemd is v246.
> >
> > BTW:
> > I change this mail subject from: lvmpolld causes IO performance issue
> > to: lvmpolld causes high cpu load issue
> > Please use this mail for later discussing.
>
>
> Hi
>
> Could you please retest with recent version of lvm2. There have been
> certainly some improvements in scanning - which might have caused in the
> older releases some higher CPU usage with longer set of devices.
>
> Regards
>
> Zdenek
The highest lvm2 version in SUSE products is lvm2-2.03.15, does this
version include the improvements change?
Could you mind to point out which commits related with the improvements?
I don't have the reproducible env, I need to get a little detail before
asking customer to try new version.
Thanks,
Heming
_______________________________________________
linux-lvm mailing list
linux-lvm@xxxxxxxxxx
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/
