[Bugs] [Bug 1479303] New: [Perf] : Large file sequential reads are off target by ~38% on FUSE/Ganesha
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Tue Aug 8 10:38:02 UTC 2017
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1479303
Bug ID: 1479303
Summary: [Perf] : Large file sequential reads are off target by
~38% on FUSE/Ganesha
Product: GlusterFS
Version: 3.12
Component: distribute
Severity: high
Assignee: bugs at gluster.org
Reporter: nbalacha at redhat.com
CC: amukherj at redhat.com, asoman at redhat.com,
bturner at redhat.com, bugs at gluster.org, dang at redhat.com,
jthottan at redhat.com, kkeithle at redhat.com,
mbenjamin at redhat.com, nbalacha at redhat.com,
rcyriac at redhat.com, rhinduja at redhat.com,
rhs-bugs at redhat.com, sanandpa at redhat.com,
skoduri at redhat.com, storage-qa-internal at redhat.com
Depends On: 1475136, 1476665
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #1476665 +++
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #1475136 +++
Description of problem:
-----------------------
A regression seems to have been introduced in recent bits on large file seq
reads :
3.2 : 2480044.05 kB/sec
3.8.4-35 : 1538178.2 kB/sec
Regression : ~38%
This is on a vanilla volume,without PR,NL,mdcache.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
-------------------------------------------------------------
3.8.4-35
How reproducible:
-----------------
100%
Additional info:
----------------
Volume Name: testvol
Type: Distributed-Replicate
Volume ID: 4b52bfb8-28fd-4e0f-8ee0-eb8116a296c4
Status: Started
Snapshot Count: 0
Number of Bricks: 2 x 2 = 4
Transport-type: tcp
Bricks:
Brick1: server1:/bricks/testvol_brick0
Brick2: server2:/bricks/testvol_brick1
Brick3: server3:/bricks/testvol_brick2
Brick4: server4:/bricks/testvol_brick3
Options Reconfigured:
server.allow-insecure: on
performance.stat-prefetch: off
transport.address-family: inet
nfs.disable: on
--- Additional comment from Nithya Balachandran on 2017-07-31 02:58:32 EDT ---
The changes made in https://review.gluster.org/#/c/17630/ have introduced a
perf regression.
The code has been changed to check if the fd is open on the dst subvol only if
the FOP returns with EBADFD.
--- Additional comment from Worker Ant on 2017-07-31 03:06:04 EDT ---
REVIEW: https://review.gluster.org/17922 (cluster/dht: Check for open fd only
on EBADF) posted (#1) for review on master by N Balachandran
(nbalacha at redhat.com)
--- Additional comment from Worker Ant on 2017-07-31 04:10:16 EDT ---
REVIEW: https://review.gluster.org/17922 (cluster/dht: Check for open fd only
on EBADF) posted (#2) for review on master by N Balachandran
(nbalacha at redhat.com)
--- Additional comment from Worker Ant on 2017-07-31 10:00:25 EDT ---
COMMIT: https://review.gluster.org/17922 committed in master by Raghavendra G
(rgowdapp at redhat.com)
------
commit 91c9f4a19fde4894576b398252c77f730832a26a
Author: N Balachandran <nbalacha at redhat.com>
Date: Mon Jul 31 12:32:59 2017 +0530
cluster/dht: Check for open fd only on EBADF
DHT fd based fops will now check if the fd is
open on the cached subvol only if the call fails
with EBADF.
This will improve performance for scenarios where
a rebalance is not running which would be most of
the time.
Change-Id: Idfaeb8927af769c6110d07a165a0fe2307369239
BUG: 1476665
Signed-off-by: N Balachandran <nbalacha at redhat.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.gluster.org/17922
Smoke: Gluster Build System <jenkins at build.gluster.org>
CentOS-regression: Gluster Build System <jenkins at build.gluster.org>
Reviewed-by: Raghavendra G <rgowdapp at redhat.com>
--- Additional comment from Worker Ant on 2017-08-03 23:26:26 EDT ---
REVIEW: https://review.gluster.org/17970 (Revert "cluster/dht: Check for open
fd only on EBADF") posted (#1) for review on master by N Balachandran
(nbalacha at redhat.com)
--- Additional comment from Worker Ant on 2017-08-04 04:56:25 EDT ---
COMMIT: https://review.gluster.org/17970 committed in master by N Balachandran
(nbalacha at redhat.com)
------
commit 6d1068ddb35be19df36210c9fcaa7ce97e2a376a
Author: N Balachandran <nbalacha at redhat.com>
Date: Fri Aug 4 08:52:31 2017 +0530
Revert "cluster/dht: Check for open fd only on EBADF"
This reverts commit 91c9f4a19fde4894576b398252c77f730832a26a.
This patch needs to be reworked.
Change-Id: I4c24f647c2b1abc68fc4e9fe6eb810418e2033aa
BUG: 1476665
Signed-off-by: N Balachandran <nbalacha at redhat.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.gluster.org/17970
Smoke: Gluster Build System <jenkins at build.gluster.org>
CentOS-regression: Gluster Build System <jenkins at build.gluster.org>
--- Additional comment from Worker Ant on 2017-08-04 05:21:40 EDT ---
REVIEW: https://review.gluster.org/17976 (cluster/dht: Check for open fd only
on EBADF) posted (#1) for review on master by N Balachandran
(nbalacha at redhat.com)
--- Additional comment from Worker Ant on 2017-08-04 05:35:31 EDT ---
REVIEW: https://review.gluster.org/17976 (cluster/dht: Check for open fd only
on EBADF) posted (#2) for review on master by N Balachandran
(nbalacha at redhat.com)
--- Additional comment from Worker Ant on 2017-08-08 06:21:28 EDT ---
COMMIT: https://review.gluster.org/17976 committed in master by Raghavendra G
(rgowdapp at redhat.com)
------
commit cdca1cb26a0aba390c6d8485c0d6d95e22ffc8bd
Author: N Balachandran <nbalacha at redhat.com>
Date: Fri Aug 4 14:46:38 2017 +0530
cluster/dht: Check for open fd only on EBADF
DHT fd based fops used to check if the fd was open
on the cached subvol before winding the call. However,
this introduced a performance regression of about
30% for reads.
This check was introduced to handle cases where files
were migrated while IOs were happening. As this is not
the common case, dht will now check if the fd is
open on the cached subvol only if the call fails
with EBADF.
This will prevent a performance hit where a rebalance
is not running.
Change-Id: I2035a858d63c3fcd22bb634055bbb0ad01686808
BUG: 1476665
Signed-off-by: N Balachandran <nbalacha at redhat.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.gluster.org/17976
Smoke: Gluster Build System <jenkins at build.gluster.org>
CentOS-regression: Gluster Build System <jenkins at build.gluster.org>
Reviewed-by: Amar Tumballi <amarts at redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Susant Palai <spalai at redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Raghavendra G <rgowdapp at redhat.com>
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1475136
[Bug 1475136] [Perf] : Large file sequential reads are off target by ~38%
on FUSE/Ganesha
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1476665
[Bug 1476665] [Perf] : Large file sequential reads are off target by ~38%
on FUSE/Ganesha
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
More information about the Bugs
mailing list