[Bugs] [Bug 1558379] Huge memory usage of FUSE client

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1558379



--- Comment #3 from Yannick Perret <yannick.perret at liris.cnrs.fr> ---
So, more tests.

I performed 16 loops of extracting the same archive onto the same place
(overwriting content) in a FUSE mountpoint with patched 3.13.2 client.
The volume is a x2 replica (default configuration) from 2 servers with the same
OS (fresh Debian 8 64b) and the same glusterfs version (but not patched on
servers).

Without the patch after *each* FS operation the memory size of the client
process grows. With the patch it grows until a certain point and then stay
stable. The archive is the latest linux kernel tarball (~154M).

Here is the client process VSZ/RSS over time:

427796 10788 (initial memory, just after mounting)
427796 10788
493332 21020 (starting extracting archive)
493332 27772
493332 45620
493332 63072
(…)
493332 88904
493332 104484
493332 128672
(…)
689940 223832
689940 228404
At this point memory size is stable.

Later I started an other extraction of the same archive in an other target
directory, while the main loop was still running. Memory increase again a
little:
689940 232172
(…)
757612 363916
757612 373788
757612 383672
757612 394316
757612 404792
(…)
888684 455848
At this point memory size is again stable.


So clearly the memory leak related to every operations is corrected, at least
for my configuration / options (note: without the patch even listing content
increased the memory size).


In my point of view there is still a question: why the memory never reduce? Now
all operations are over on the mountpoint (for ~4 hours now) and memory size is
still exactly the same.
I also then deleted all content from the mountpoint without any change.

Is it an other kind of memory leak? Is it some kind of cached data? But if it
is cached data it should have expired now, moreover after deleting all content
(caching non-existing nodes don't seems useful).


I can of course perform more tests if it can help, please let me know.
By my side I will run other copies with other directory targets, in order to
see if memory will still grows (a little now) and stay like this.

Thanks,
--
Y.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.