[Gluster-devel] Major slowdown in cp performance in 1.4 branch

Tue Aug 26 17:49:11 UTC 2008

No, I noticed the trace translator and removed it yesterday, just before 
Amar warned me that it was there; no effect.  The crash is gone now, but 
the slowdown on writes is still an issue.  Avati's suggestion sounds good; 
I'll try keeping my setup intact, but eliminate the AFRs and see what 
happens.

Thanks,

Brent

On Tue, 26 Aug 2008, Anand Babu Periasamy wrote:

> Avati, trace translator is loaded in this setup. It could have the slowdown 
> or crash!
> --
> Anand Babu Periasamy
> GPG Key ID: 0x62E15A31
> Blog [http://ab.freeshell.org]
> The GNU Operating System [http://www.gnu.org]
> Z RESEARCH Inc [http://www.zresearch.com]
>
>
>
> Anand Avati wrote:
>> Brent,
>>  do you have a non-AFR volume to compare the write speeds against?
>> 
>> avati
>> 
>> 2008/8/26 Brent A Nelson <brent at phys.ufl.edu>
>> 
>>> I don't seem to be getting this crashing namespace issue anymore with a 
>>> tla
>>> from today and adding posix-locks to my namespace exports (which are 
>>> AFRed,
>>> and AFR now needs locking, which sounds like a good thing).
>>> 
>>> Writes are still just as slow (3.3MBps), but dd reads are very fast
>>> (~117-118MBps, apparently saturating my gigabit link).
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> Brent
>>> 
>>> On Mon, 25 Aug 2008, Brent A Nelson wrote:
>>>
>>>  I went to try to test the read performance of that file and got:
>>>> dd if=/beast/blah0 of=/dev/null bs=1M
>>>> dd: opening `/beast/blah0': Input/output error
>>>> ls -al /beast
>>>> ls: cannot access /beast: No such file or directory
>>>> df
>>>> ...
>>>> glusterfs            5697753088   4054016 5406548992   1% /beast
>>>> df /beast
>>>> df: `/beast': No such file or directory
>>>> df: no file systems processed
>>>> 
>>>> Looking through the processes, I see the namespace volumes both died.
>>>> 
>>>> Here's the tail end of one log:
>>>> 
>>>> 2008-08-25 17:57:43 N [trace.c:1117:trace_lookup] ns0: callid: 420040
>>>> (*this=0x8052ff8, loc=0xbf99a9a0 {path=/blah0, inode=0x80a2070} )
>>>> 2008-08-25 17:57:43 N [trace.c:535:trace_lookup_cbk] ns0: callid: 420040
>>>> (*this=0x8052ff8, op_ret=0, op_errno=61, inode=0x80a2070, *buf=0xbf99a864
>>>> {st_dev=65031, st_ino=28855, st_mode=33188, st_nlink=1, st_uid=0, 
>>>> st_gid=0,
>>>> st_rdev=0, st_size=0, st_blksize=4096, st_blocks=0})
>>>> 2008-08-25 17:57:43 N [trace.c:1505:trace_open] ns0: (*this=0x8052ff8,
>>>> loc=0x80adf20 {path=/blah0, inode=0x80a2070}, flags=32768, fd=0x80988e8)
>>>> 2008-08-25 17:57:43 N [trace.c:150:trace_open_cbk] ns0: (*this=0x8052ff8,
>>>> op_ret=0, op_errno=0, *fd=0x80988e8)
>>>> 2008-08-25 17:57:43 W [common-utils.c:156:gf_print_bytes] glusterfs: 
>>>> Total
>>>> data (in bytes): transfered (47460701), received (41736499)
>>>> pending frames:
>>>> frame : type(1) op(40)
>>>> 
>>>> Signal received: 11/lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6[0xb7d99128]
>>>> /usr/lib/libglusterfs.so.0(default_gf_lk+0xb4)[0xb7ee8724]
>>>> 
>>>> /usr/lib/glusterfs/1.4.0qa34/xlator/protocol/server.so(server_lk_common+0x6ff)[0xb7cf93df]
>>>> 
>>>> /usr/lib/glusterfs/1.4.0qa34/xlator/protocol/server.so(server_gf_lk+0x48)[0xb7cf95d8]
>>>> 
>>>> /usr/lib/glusterfs/1.4.0qa34/xlator/protocol/server.so(protocol_server_interpret+0xd6)[0xb7cf41e6]
>>>> 
>>>> /usr/lib/glusterfs/1.4.0qa34/xlator/protocol/server.so(protocol_server_pollin+0xb3)[0xb7cf43e3]
>>>> 
>>>> /usr/lib/glusterfs/1.4.0qa34/xlator/protocol/server.so(notify+0x51)[0xb7cf44e1]
>>>> /usr/lib/glusterfs/1.4.0qa34/transport/socket.so[0xb74e7f3a]
>>>> /usr/lib/libglusterfs.so.0[0xb7ef6a45]
>>>> /usr/lib/libglusterfs.so.0(event_dispatch+0x21)[0xb7ef5661]
>>>> glusterfsd(main+0x953)[0x804a163]
>>>> /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xe0)[0xb7d84450]
>>>> glusterfsd[0x80497a1]
>>>> ---------
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> 
>>>> Brent
>>>> 
>>>> On Mon, 25 Aug 2008, Brent A Nelson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  3.2 MBps, which is far less than previous, on a "dd if=/dev/zero
>>>>> of=/beast/blah0 bs=1M count=10000"
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Brent
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Mon, 25 Aug 2008, Amar S. Tumballi wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>  Brent,
>>>>>> Can you check the dd speed too? One user on irc reported very slow cp
>>>>>> performance too, but his dd performance was good.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 2008/8/25 Brent A Nelson <brent at phys.ufl.edu>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  A checkout today from the 1.4 branch seems to give terrible 
>>>>>> performance
>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>> "cp -a".  Something that took a little over 9 minutes from a checkout
>>>>>>> last
>>>>>>> week now takes over an hour (it hasn't finished yet).  CPU time
>>>>>>> consumed by
>>>>>>> glusterfs and all the glusterfsd processes is quite a bit smaller than
>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>> used to be; it looks like a recent patch is causing a substantial
>>>>>>> performance issue...
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Brent
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Gluster-devel mailing list
>>>>>>> Gluster-devel at nongnu.org
>>>>>>> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Amar Tumballi
>>>>>> Gluster/GlusterFS Hacker
>>>>>> [bulde on #gluster/irc.gnu.org]
>>>>>> http://www.zresearch.com - Commoditizing Super Storage!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Gluster-devel mailing list
>>> Gluster-devel at nongnu.org
>>> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>