On Mon, 04/24 19:54, 858585 jemmy wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 3:40 PM, 858585 jemmy <jemmy858...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 12:00 PM, 858585 jemmy <jemmy858...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >> On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 11:49 AM, Fam Zheng <f...@redhat.com> wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 04/14 14:30, 858585 jemmy wrote:
> >>>> Do you know some other format which have very small cluster size?
> >>>
> >>> 64k is the default cluster size for qcow2 but it can be configured at
> >>> image
> >>> creation time, as 512 bytes, for example:
> >>>
> >>> $ qemu-img create -f qcow2 test.qcow2 -o cluster_size=512 1G
> >>
> >> Thanks, i will test the performance again.
> >
> > I find the performance reduce when cluster size is 512.
> > I will optimize the performance and submit a patch later.
> > Thanks.
>
> after optimize the code, i find the destination qemu process still have very
> bad performance when cluster_size is 512. the reason is cause by
> qcow2_check_metadata_overlap.
>
> if cluster_size is 512, the destination qemu process reach 100% cpu usage.
> and the perf top result is below:
>
> Samples: 32K of event 'cycles', Event count (approx.): 20105269445
> 91.68% qemu-system-x86_64 [.] qcow2_check_metadata_overlap
> 3.33% qemu-system-x86_64 [.] range_get_last
> 2.76% qemu-system-x86_64 [.] ranges_overlap
> 0.61% qemu-system-x86_64 [.] qcow2_cache_do_get
>
> very large l1_size.
> (gdb) p s->l1_size
> $3 = 1310720
>
> (gdb) p s->max_refcount_table_index
> $5 = 21905
>
> the backtrace:
>
> Breakpoint 1, qcow2_check_metadata_overlap (bs=0x16feb00, ign=0,
> offset=440329728, size=4096) at block/qcow2-refcount.c:2344
> 2344 {
> (gdb) bt
> #0 qcow2_check_metadata_overlap (bs=0x16feb00, ign=0,
> offset=440329728, size=4096) at block/qcow2-refcount.c:2344
> #1 0x0000000000878d9f in qcow2_pre_write_overlap_check (bs=0x16feb00,
> ign=0, offset=440329728, size=4096) at block/qcow2-refcount.c:2473
> #2 0x000000000086e382 in qcow2_co_pwritev (bs=0x16feb00,
> offset=771047424, bytes=704512, qiov=0x7fd026bfdb90, flags=0) at
> block/qcow2.c:1653
> #3 0x00000000008aeace in bdrv_driver_pwritev (bs=0x16feb00,
> offset=770703360, bytes=1048576, qiov=0x7fd026bfdb90, flags=0) at
> block/io.c:871
> #4 0x00000000008b015c in bdrv_aligned_pwritev (child=0x171b630,
> req=0x7fd026bfd980, offset=770703360, bytes=1048576, align=1,
> qiov=0x7fd026bfdb90, flags=0) at block/io.c:1371
> #5 0x00000000008b0d77 in bdrv_co_pwritev (child=0x171b630,
> offset=770703360, bytes=1048576, qiov=0x7fd026bfdb90, flags=0) at
> block/io.c:1622
> #6 0x000000000089a76d in blk_co_pwritev (blk=0x16fe920,
> offset=770703360, bytes=1048576, qiov=0x7fd026bfdb90, flags=0) at
> block/block-backend.c:992
> #7 0x000000000089a878 in blk_write_entry (opaque=0x7fd026bfdb70) at
> block/block-backend.c:1017
> #8 0x000000000089a95d in blk_prw (blk=0x16fe920, offset=770703360,
> buf=0x362b050 "", bytes=1048576, co_entry=0x89a81a <blk_write_entry>,
> flags=0) at block/block-backend.c:1045
> #9 0x000000000089b222 in blk_pwrite (blk=0x16fe920, offset=770703360,
> buf=0x362b050, count=1048576, flags=0) at block/block-backend.c:1208
> #10 0x00000000007d480d in block_load (f=0x1784fa0, opaque=0xfd46a0,
> version_id=1) at migration/block.c:992
> #11 0x000000000049dc58 in vmstate_load (f=0x1784fa0, se=0x16fbdc0,
> version_id=1) at /data/qemu/migration/savevm.c:730
> #12 0x00000000004a0752 in qemu_loadvm_section_part_end (f=0x1784fa0,
> mis=0xfd4160) at /data/qemu/migration/savevm.c:1923
> #13 0x00000000004a0842 in qemu_loadvm_state_main (f=0x1784fa0,
> mis=0xfd4160) at /data/qemu/migration/savevm.c:1954
> #14 0x00000000004a0a33 in qemu_loadvm_state (f=0x1784fa0) at
> /data/qemu/migration/savevm.c:2020
> #15 0x00000000007c2d33 in process_incoming_migration_co
> (opaque=0x1784fa0) at migration/migration.c:404
> #16 0x0000000000966593 in coroutine_trampoline (i0=27108400, i1=0) at
> util/coroutine-ucontext.c:79
> #17 0x00007fd03946b8f0 in ?? () from /lib64/libc.so.6
> #18 0x00007fff869c87e0 in ?? ()
> #19 0x0000000000000000 in ?? ()
>
> when the cluster_size is too small, the write performance is very bad.
> How to solve this problem? Any suggestion?
> 1. when the cluster_size is too small, not invoke
> qcow2_pre_write_overlap_check.
> 2.limit the qcow2 cluster_size range, don't allow set the cluster_size
> too small.
> which way is better?
It's a separate problem.
I think what should be done in this patch (or a follow up) is coalescing the
same type of write as much as possible (by type I mean "zeroed" or "normal"
write). With that, cluster size won't matter that much.
Fam
