[Gluster-devel] Rebalance improvement design
Benjamin Turner
bennyturns at gmail.com
Fri May 1 04:53:32 UTC 2015
Ok I have all my data created and I just started the rebalance. One thing
to not in the client log I see the following spamming:
[root at gqac006 ~]# cat /var/log/glusterfs/gluster-mount-.log | wc -l
394042
[2015-05-01 00:47:55.591150] I [MSGID: 109036]
[dht-common.c:6478:dht_log_new_layout_for_dir_selfheal] 0-testvol-dht:
Setting layout of /file_dstdir/
gqac006.sbu.lab.eng.bos.redhat.com/thrd_05/d_001/d_000/d_004/d_006 with
[Subvol_name: testvol-replicate-0, Err: -1 , Start: 0 , Stop: 2141429669 ],
[Subvol_name: testvol-replicate-1, Err: -1 , Start: 2141429670 , Stop:
4294967295 ],
[2015-05-01 00:47:55.596147] I
[dht-selfheal.c:1587:dht_selfheal_layout_new_directory] 0-testvol-dht:
chunk size = 0xffffffff / 19920276 = 0xd7
[2015-05-01 00:47:55.596177] I
[dht-selfheal.c:1626:dht_selfheal_layout_new_directory] 0-testvol-dht:
assigning range size 0x7fa39fa6 to testvol-replicate-1
[2015-05-01 00:47:55.596189] I
[dht-selfheal.c:1626:dht_selfheal_layout_new_directory] 0-testvol-dht:
assigning range size 0x7fa39fa6 to testvol-replicate-0
[2015-05-01 00:47:55.597081] I [MSGID: 109036]
[dht-common.c:6478:dht_log_new_layout_for_dir_selfheal] 0-testvol-dht:
Setting layout of /file_dstdir/
gqac006.sbu.lab.eng.bos.redhat.com/thrd_05/d_001/d_000/d_004/d_005 with
[Subvol_name: testvol-replicate-0, Err: -1 , Start: 2141429670 , Stop:
4294967295 ], [Subvol_name: testvol-replicate-1, Err: -1 , Start: 0 , Stop:
2141429669 ],
[2015-05-01 00:47:55.601853] I
[dht-selfheal.c:1587:dht_selfheal_layout_new_directory] 0-testvol-dht:
chunk size = 0xffffffff / 19920276 = 0xd7
[2015-05-01 00:47:55.601882] I
[dht-selfheal.c:1626:dht_selfheal_layout_new_directory] 0-testvol-dht:
assigning range size 0x7fa39fa6 to testvol-replicate-1
[2015-05-01 00:47:55.601895] I
[dht-selfheal.c:1626:dht_selfheal_layout_new_directory] 0-testvol-dht:
assigning range size 0x7fa39fa6 to testvol-replicate-0
Just to confirm the patch is
in, glusterfs-3.8dev-0.71.gita7f8482.el6.x86_64. Correct?
Here is the info on the data set:
hosts in test : ['gqac006.sbu.lab.eng.bos.redhat.com', '
gqas003.sbu.lab.eng.bos.redhat.com']
top test directory(s) : ['/gluster-mount']
peration : create
files/thread : 500000
threads : 8
record size (KB, 0 = maximum) : 0
file size (KB) : 64
file size distribution : fixed
files per dir : 100
dirs per dir : 10
total threads = 16
total files = 7222600
total data = 440.833 GB
90.28% of requested files processed, minimum is 70.00
8107.852862 sec elapsed time
890.815377 files/sec
890.815377 IOPS
55.675961 MB/sec
Here is the rebalance run after about 5 or so minutes:
[root at gqas001 ~]# gluster v rebalance testvol status
Node Rebalanced-files size
scanned failures skipped status run time in
secs
--------- ----------- -----------
----------- ----------- ----------- ------------
--------------
localhost 32203 2.0GB
120858 0 5184 in progress
1294.00
gqas011.sbu.lab.eng.bos.redhat.com 0 0Bytes
0 0 0 failed
0.00
gqas016.sbu.lab.eng.bos.redhat.com 9364 585.2MB
53121 0 0 in progress
1294.00
gqas013.sbu.lab.eng.bos.redhat.com 0 0Bytes
14750 0 0 in progress
1294.00
gqas014.sbu.lab.eng.bos.redhat.com 0 0Bytes
0 0 0 failed
0.00
gqas015.sbu.lab.eng.bos.redhat.com 0 0Bytes
196382 0 0 in progress
1294.00
volume rebalance: testvol: success:
The hostnames are there if you want to poke around. I had a problem with
one of the added systems being on a different version of glusterfs so I had
to update everything to glusterfs-3.8dev-0.99.git7d7b80e.el6.x86_64, remove
the bricks I just added, and add them back. Something may have went wrong
in that process but I thought I did everything correctly. I'll start fresh
tomorrow. I figured I'd let this run over night.
-b
On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 9:48 PM, Benjamin Turner <bennyturns at gmail.com>
wrote:
> Sweet! Here is the baseline:
>
> [root at gqas001 ~]# gluster v rebalance testvol status
> Node Rebalanced-files size
> scanned failures skipped status run time in
> secs
> --------- ----------- -----------
> ----------- ----------- ----------- ------------
> --------------
> localhost 1328575 81.1GB
> 9402953 0 0 completed
> 98500.00
> gqas012.sbu.lab.eng.bos.redhat.com 0 0Bytes
> 8000011 0 0 completed
> 51982.00
> gqas003.sbu.lab.eng.bos.redhat.com 0 0Bytes
> 8000011 0 0 completed
> 51982.00
> gqas004.sbu.lab.eng.bos.redhat.com 1326290 81.0GB
> 9708625 0 0 completed
> 98500.00
> gqas013.sbu.lab.eng.bos.redhat.com 0 0Bytes
> 8000011 0 0 completed
> 51982.00
> gqas014.sbu.lab.eng.bos.redhat.com 0 0Bytes
> 8000011 0 0 completed
> 51982.00
> volume rebalance: testvol: success:
>
> I'll have a run on the patch started tomorrow.
>
> -b
>
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Nithya Balachandran <nbalacha at redhat.com
> > wrote:
>
>>
>> Doh my mistake, I thought it was merged. I was just running with the
>> upstream 3.7 daily. Can I use this run as my baseline and then I can run
>> next time on the patch to show the % improvement? I'll wipe everything
>> and
>> try on the patch, any idea when it will be merged?
>>
>> Yes, it would be very useful to have this run as the baseline. The patch
>> has just been merged in master. It should be backported to 3.7 in a day or
>> so.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Nithya
>>
>>
>> > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 1:10 AM, Nithya Balachandran
>> > > > > > <nbalacha at redhat.com>
>> > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > That sounds great. Thanks.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Regards,
>> > > > > > > Nithya
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
>> > > > > > > From: "Benjamin Turner" <bennyturns at gmail.com>
>> > > > > > > To: "Nithya Balachandran" <nbalacha at redhat.com>
>> > > > > > > Cc: "Susant Palai" <spalai at redhat.com>, "Gluster Devel" <
>> > > > > > > gluster-devel at gluster.org>
>> > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, 22 April, 2015 12:14:14 AM
>> > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Gluster-devel] Rebalance improvement design
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I am setting up a test env now, I'll have some feedback for
>> you
>> > this
>> > > > > > > week.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > -b
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Nithya Balachandran
>> > > > > > > <nbalacha at redhat.com
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Hi Ben,
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Did you get a chance to try this out?
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Regards,
>> > > > > > > > Nithya
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
>> > > > > > > > From: "Susant Palai" <spalai at redhat.com>
>> > > > > > > > To: "Benjamin Turner" <bennyturns at gmail.com>
>> > > > > > > > Cc: "Gluster Devel" <gluster-devel at gluster.org>
>> > > > > > > > Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 9:55:07 AM
>> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Gluster-devel] Rebalance improvement design
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Hi Ben,
>> > > > > > > > Uploaded a new patch here:
>> > http://review.gluster.org/#/c/9657/.
>> > > > > > > > We
>> > > > > > > > can
>> > > > > > > > start perf test on it. :)
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Susant
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
>> > > > > > > > From: "Susant Palai" <spalai at redhat.com>
>> > > > > > > > To: "Benjamin Turner" <bennyturns at gmail.com>
>> > > > > > > > Cc: "Gluster Devel" <gluster-devel at gluster.org>
>> > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, 9 April, 2015 3:40:09 PM
>> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Gluster-devel] Rebalance improvement design
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Thanks Ben. RPM is not available and I am planning to
>> refresh
>> > the
>> > > > > > > > patch
>> > > > > > > in
>> > > > > > > > two days with some more regression fixes. I think we can run
>> > the
>> > > > > > > > tests
>> > > > > > > post
>> > > > > > > > that. Any larger data-set will be good(say 3 to 5 TB).
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Thanks,
>> > > > > > > > Susant
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
>> > > > > > > > From: "Benjamin Turner" <bennyturns at gmail.com>
>> > > > > > > > To: "Vijay Bellur" <vbellur at redhat.com>
>> > > > > > > > Cc: "Susant Palai" <spalai at redhat.com>, "Gluster Devel" <
>> > > > > > > > gluster-devel at gluster.org>
>> > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, 9 April, 2015 2:10:30 AM
>> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Gluster-devel] Rebalance improvement design
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > I have some rebalance perf regression stuff I have been
>> > working on,
>> > > > > > > > is
>> > > > > > > > there an RPM with these patches anywhere so that I can try
>> it
>> > on my
>> > > > > > > > systems? If not I'll just build from:
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > git fetch git:// review.gluster.org/glusterfs
>> > > > > > > > refs/changes/57/9657/8
>> > > > > > > > &&
>> > > > > > > > git cherry-pick FETCH_HEAD
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > I will have _at_least_ 10TB of storage, how many TBs of data
>> > should
>> > > > > > > > I
>> > > > > > > > run
>> > > > > > > > with?
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > -b
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 9:07 AM, Vijay Bellur <
>> > vbellur at redhat.com >
>> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > On 04/07/2015 03:08 PM, Susant Palai wrote:
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Here is one test performed on a 300GB data set and around
>> > 100%(1/2
>> > > > > > > > the
>> > > > > > > > time) improvement was seen.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > [root at gprfs031 ~]# gluster v i
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Volume Name: rbperf
>> > > > > > > > Type: Distribute
>> > > > > > > > Volume ID: 35562662-337e-4923-b862- d0bbb0748003
>> > > > > > > > Status: Started
>> > > > > > > > Number of Bricks: 4
>> > > > > > > > Transport-type: tcp
>> > > > > > > > Bricks:
>> > > > > > > > Brick1: gprfs029-10ge:/bricks/ gprfs029/brick1
>> > > > > > > > Brick2: gprfs030-10ge:/bricks/ gprfs030/brick1
>> > > > > > > > Brick3: gprfs031-10ge:/bricks/ gprfs031/brick1
>> > > > > > > > Brick4: gprfs032-10ge:/bricks/ gprfs032/brick1
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Added server 32 and started rebalance force.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Rebalance stat for new changes:
>> > > > > > > > [root at gprfs031 ~]# gluster v rebalance rbperf status
>> > > > > > > > Node Rebalanced-files size scanned failures skipped status
>> run
>> > time
>> > > > > > > > in
>> > > > > > > secs
>> > > > > > > > --------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
>> > > > > > > > -----------
>> > > > > > > > ------------ --------------
>> > > > > > > > localhost 74639 36.1GB 297319 0 0 completed 1743.00
>> > > > > > > > 172.17.40.30 67512 33.5GB 269187 0 0 completed 1395.00
>> > > > > > > > gprfs029-10ge 79095 38.8GB 284105 0 0 completed 1559.00
>> > > > > > > > gprfs032-10ge 0 0Bytes 0 0 0 completed 402.00
>> > > > > > > > volume rebalance: rbperf: success:
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Rebalance stat for old model:
>> > > > > > > > [root at gprfs031 ~]# gluster v rebalance rbperf status
>> > > > > > > > Node Rebalanced-files size scanned failures skipped status
>> run
>> > time
>> > > > > > > > in
>> > > > > > > secs
>> > > > > > > > --------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
>> > > > > > > > -----------
>> > > > > > > > ------------ --------------
>> > > > > > > > localhost 86493 42.0GB 634302 0 0 completed 3329.00
>> > > > > > > > gprfs029-10ge 94115 46.2GB 687852 0 0 completed 3328.00
>> > > > > > > > gprfs030-10ge 74314 35.9GB 651943 0 0 completed 3072.00
>> > > > > > > > gprfs032-10ge 0 0Bytes 594166 0 0 completed 1943.00
>> > > > > > > > volume rebalance: rbperf: success:
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > This is interesting. Thanks for sharing & well done! Maybe
>> we
>> > > > > > > > should
>> > > > > > > > attempt a much larger data set and see how we fare there :).
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Regards,
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Vijay
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > ______________________________ _________________
>> > > > > > > > Gluster-devel mailing list
>> > > > > > > > Gluster-devel at gluster.org
>> > > > > > > > http://www.gluster.org/ mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > > > > > Gluster-devel mailing list
>> > > > > > > > Gluster-devel at gluster.org
>> > > > > > > > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > > > > > Gluster-devel mailing list
>> > > > > > > > Gluster-devel at gluster.org
>> > > > > > > > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > > Gluster-devel mailing list
>> > > > > Gluster-devel at gluster.org
>> > > > > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>> > > > >
>> > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > Gluster-devel mailing list
>> > > > Gluster-devel at gluster.org
>> > > > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-devel/attachments/20150501/e7ba90ce/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Gluster-devel
mailing list