Hi Shinobu, I am using SUSE packages in scope of their latest SUSE Enterprise Storage 4 and following documentation (method of deployment: ceph-deploy) But, I was able reproduce this issue on Ubuntu 14.04 with Ceph repositories (also latest Jewel and ceph-deploy) as well.
On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 3:03 AM, Shinobu Kinjo <ski...@redhat.com> wrote: > Are you using opensource Ceph packages or suse ones? > > On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Ahmed Khuraidah <abushi...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> I Have opened ticket on http://tracker.ceph.com/ >> >> http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/18816 >> >> >> My client and server kernels are the same, here is info: >> # lsb_release -a >> LSB Version: n/a >> Distributor ID: SUSE >> Description: SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 12 SP2 >> Release: 12.2 >> Codename: n/a >> # uname -a >> Linux cephnode 4.4.38-93-default #1 SMP Wed Dec 14 12:59:43 UTC 2016 >> (2d3e9d4) x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux >> >> >> Thanks >> >> On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 1:59 PM, John Spray <jsp...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 8:07 AM, Ahmed Khuraidah <abushi...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > Thank you guys, >>> > >>> > I tried to add option "exec_prerun=echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches" >>> as >>> > well as "exec_prerun=echo 3 | sudo tee /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches", but >>> > despite FIO corresponds that command was executed, there are no >>> changes. >>> > >>> > But, I caught very strange another behavior. If I will run my FIO test >>> > (speaking about 3G file case) twice, after the first run FIO will >>> create my >>> > file and print a lot of IOps as described already, but if- before >>> second >>> > run- drop cache (by root echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches) I broke >>> will end >>> > with broken MDS: >>> > >>> > --- begin dump of recent events --- >>> > 0> 2017-02-03 02:34:41.974639 7f7e8ec5e700 -1 *** Caught signal >>> > (Aborted) ** >>> > in thread 7f7e8ec5e700 thread_name:ms_dispatch >>> > >>> > ceph version 10.2.4-211-g12b091b (12b091b4a40947aa43919e71a318e >>> d0dcedc8734) >>> > 1: (()+0x5142a2) [0x557c51e092a2] >>> > 2: (()+0x10b00) [0x7f7e95df2b00] >>> > 3: (gsignal()+0x37) [0x7f7e93ccb8d7] >>> > 4: (abort()+0x13a) [0x7f7e93ccccaa] >>> > 5: (ceph::__ceph_assert_fail(char const*, char const*, int, char >>> > const*)+0x265) [0x557c51f133d5] >>> > 6: (MutationImpl::~MutationImpl()+0x28e) [0x557c51bb9e1e] >>> > 7: (std::_Sp_counted_base<(__gnu_cxx::_Lock_policy)2>::_M_relea >>> se()+0x39) >>> > [0x557c51b2ccf9] >>> > 8: (Locker::check_inode_max_size(CInode*, bool, bool, unsigned long, >>> bool, >>> > unsigned long, utime_t)+0x9a7) [0x557c51ca2757] >>> > 9: (Locker::remove_client_cap(CInode*, client_t)+0xb1) >>> [0x557c51ca38f1] >>> > 10: (Locker::_do_cap_release(client_t, inodeno_t, unsigned long, >>> unsigned >>> > int, unsigned int)+0x90d) [0x557c51ca424d] >>> > 11: (Locker::handle_client_cap_release(MClientCapRelease*)+0x1cc) >>> > [0x557c51ca449c] >>> > 12: (MDSRank::handle_deferrable_message(Message*)+0xc1c) >>> [0x557c51b33d3c] >>> > 13: (MDSRank::_dispatch(Message*, bool)+0x1e1) [0x557c51b3c991] >>> > 14: (MDSRankDispatcher::ms_dispatch(Message*)+0x15) [0x557c51b3dae5] >>> > 15: (MDSDaemon::ms_dispatch(Message*)+0xc3) [0x557c51b25703] >>> > 16: (DispatchQueue::entry()+0x78b) [0x557c5200d06b] >>> > 17: (DispatchQueue::DispatchThread::entry()+0xd) [0x557c51ee5dcd] >>> > 18: (()+0x8734) [0x7f7e95dea734] >>> > 19: (clone()+0x6d) [0x7f7e93d80d3d] >>> > NOTE: a copy of the executable, or `objdump -rdS <executable>` is >>> needed to >>> > interpret this. >>> >>> Oops! Please could you open a ticket on tracker.ceph.com, with this >>> backtrace, the client versions, any non-default config settings, and >>> the series of operations that led up to it. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> John >>> >>> > " >>> > >>> > On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 9:30 PM, Shinobu Kinjo <ski...@redhat.com> >>> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> You may want to add this in your FIO recipe. >>> >> >>> >> * exec_prerun=echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches >>> >> >>> >> Regards, >>> >> >>> >> On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 12:36 AM, Wido den Hollander <w...@42on.com> >>> wrote: >>> >> > >>> >> >> Op 2 februari 2017 om 15:35 schreef Ahmed Khuraidah >>> >> >> <abushi...@gmail.com>: >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> Hi all, >>> >> >> >>> >> >> I am still confused about my CephFS sandbox. >>> >> >> >>> >> >> When I am performing simple FIO test into single file with size of >>> 3G I >>> >> >> have too many IOps: >>> >> >> >>> >> >> cephnode:~ # fio payloadrandread64k3G >>> >> >> test: (g=0): rw=randread, bs=64K-64K/64K-64K/64K-64K, >>> ioengine=libaio, >>> >> >> iodepth=2 >>> >> >> fio-2.13 >>> >> >> Starting 1 process >>> >> >> test: Laying out IO file(s) (1 file(s) / 3072MB) >>> >> >> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [r(1)] [100.0% done] [277.8MB/0KB/0KB /s] [4444/0/0 >>> >> >> iops] >>> >> >> [eta 00m:00s] >>> >> >> test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=3714: Thu Feb 2 07:07:01 >>> 2017 >>> >> >> read : io=3072.0MB, bw=181101KB/s, iops=2829, runt= 17370msec >>> >> >> slat (usec): min=4, max=386, avg=12.49, stdev= 6.90 >>> >> >> clat (usec): min=202, max=5673.5K, avg=690.81, stdev=361 >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> But if I will change size to file to 320G, looks like I skip the >>> cache: >>> >> >> >>> >> >> cephnode:~ # fio payloadrandread64k320G >>> >> >> test: (g=0): rw=randread, bs=64K-64K/64K-64K/64K-64K, >>> ioengine=libaio, >>> >> >> iodepth=2 >>> >> >> fio-2.13 >>> >> >> Starting 1 process >>> >> >> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [r(1)] [100.0% done] [4740KB/0KB/0KB /s] [74/0/0 >>> iops] >>> >> >> [eta >>> >> >> 00m:00s] >>> >> >> test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=3624: Thu Feb 2 06:51:09 >>> 2017 >>> >> >> read : io=3410.9MB, bw=11641KB/s, iops=181, runt=300033msec >>> >> >> slat (usec): min=4, max=442, avg=14.43, stdev=10.07 >>> >> >> clat (usec): min=98, max=286265, avg=10976.32, stdev=14904.82 >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> For random write test such behavior not exists, there are almost >>> the >>> >> >> same >>> >> >> results - around 100 IOps. >>> >> >> >>> >> >> So my question: could please somebody clarify where this caching >>> likely >>> >> >> happens and how to manage it? >>> >> >> >>> >> > >>> >> > The page cache of your kernel. The kernel will cache the file in >>> memory >>> >> > and perform read operations from there. >>> >> > >>> >> > Best way is to reboot your client between test runs. Although you >>> can >>> >> > drop kernel caches I always reboot to make sure nothing is cached >>> locally. >>> >> > >>> >> > Wido >>> >> > >>> >> >> P.S. >>> >> >> This is latest SLES/Jewel based onenode setup which has: >>> >> >> 1 MON, 1 MDS (both data and metadata pools on SATA drive) and 1 OSD >>> >> >> (XFS on >>> >> >> SATA and journal on SSD). >>> >> >> My FIO config file: >>> >> >> direct=1 >>> >> >> buffered=0 >>> >> >> ioengine=libaio >>> >> >> iodepth=2 >>> >> >> runtime=300 >>> >> >> >>> >> >> Thanks >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >>> >> >> ceph-users mailing list >>> >> >> ceph-users@lists.ceph.com >>> >> >> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com >>> >> > _______________________________________________ >>> >> > ceph-users mailing list >>> >> > ceph-users@lists.ceph.com >>> >> > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > ceph-users mailing list >>> > ceph-users@lists.ceph.com >>> > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com >>> > >>> >> >> >
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
