[Gluster-users] Quota issue

Vijaikumar M vmallika at redhat.com
Tue Jun 9 07:01:55 UTC 2015



On Monday 08 June 2015 07:11 PM, Geoffrey Letessier wrote:
> In addition, i notice a very big difference between the sum of DU on 
> each brick and « quota list » display, as you can read below:
> [root at lucifer ~]# pdsh -w cl-storage[1,3] du -sh 
> /export/brick_home/brick*/amyloid_team
> cl-storage1: 1,6T/export/brick_home/brick1/amyloid_team
> cl-storage3: 1,6T/export/brick_home/brick1/amyloid_team
> cl-storage1: 1,6T/export/brick_home/brick2/amyloid_team
> cl-storage3: 1,6T/export/brick_home/brick2/amyloid_team
> [root at lucifer ~]# gluster volume quota vol_home list /amyloid_team
>                   Path                   Hard-limit Soft-limit   Used  
> Available
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> /amyloid_team                              9.0TB   90%       7.8TB   1.2TB
>
> As you can notice, the sum of all bricks gives me roughly 6.4TB and 
> « quota list » around 7.8TB; so there is a difference of 1.4TB i’m not 
> able to explain… Do you have any idea?
>

There were few issues when quota accounting the size, we have fixed some 
of these issues in 3.7
'df -h' will round off the values, can you please provide the output of 
'df' without -h option?




> Thanks,
> Geoffrey
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Geoffrey Letessier
> Responsable informatique & ingénieur système
> UPR 9080 - CNRS - Laboratoire de Biochimie Théorique
> Institut de Biologie Physico-Chimique
> 13, rue Pierre et Marie Curie - 75005 Paris
> Tel: 01 58 41 50 93 - eMail: geoffrey.letessier at ibpc.fr 
> <mailto:geoffrey.letessier at ibpc.fr>
>
>> Le 8 juin 2015 à 14:30, Geoffrey Letessier 
>> <geoffrey.letessier at cnrs.fr <mailto:geoffrey.letessier at cnrs.fr>> a 
>> écrit :
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Concerning the 3.5.3 version of GlusterFS, I met this morning a 
>> strange issue writing file when quota is exceeded.
>>
>> One person of my lab, whose her quota is exceeded (but she didn’t 
>> know about) try to modify a file but, because of exceeded quota, she 
>> was unable to and decided to exit VI. Now, her file is empty/blank as 
>> you can read below:
we suspect 'vi' might have created tmp file before writing to a file. We 
are working on re-creating this problem and will update you on the same.


>> pdsh at lucifer: cl-storage3: ssh exited with exit code 2
>> cl-storage1: ---------T 2 tarus amyloid_team 0 19 févr. 12:34 
>> /export/brick_home/brick1/amyloid_team/tarus/project/ab1-40-x1_sen304-x2_inh3-x2/remd_charmm22star_scripts/remd_115.sh
>> cl-storage1: -rwxrw-r-- 2 tarus amyloid_team 0  8 juin  12:38 
>> /export/brick_home/brick2/amyloid_team/tarus/project/ab1-40-x1_sen304-x2_inh3-x2/remd_charmm22star_scripts/remd_115.sh
>>
>> In addition, i dont understand why, my volume being a distributed 
>> volume inside replica (cl-storage[1,3] is replicated only on 
>> cl-storage[2,4]), i have 2 « same » files (complete path) in 2 
>> different bricks (as you can read above).
>>
>> Thanks by advance for your help and clarification.
>> Geoffrey
>> ------------------------------------------------------
>> Geoffrey Letessier
>> Responsable informatique & ingénieur système
>> UPR 9080 - CNRS - Laboratoire de Biochimie Théorique
>> Institut de Biologie Physico-Chimique
>> 13, rue Pierre et Marie Curie - 75005 Paris
>> Tel: 01 58 41 50 93 - eMail: geoffrey.letessier at ibpc.fr 
>> <mailto:geoffrey.letessier at ibpc.fr>
>>
>>> Le 2 juin 2015 à 23:45, Geoffrey Letessier 
>>> <geoffrey.letessier at cnrs.fr <mailto:geoffrey.letessier at cnrs.fr>> a 
>>> écrit :
>>>
>>> Hi Ben,
>>>
>>> I just check my messages log files, both on client and server, and I 
>>> dont find any hung task you notice on yours..
>>>
>>> As you can read below, i dont note the performance issue in a simple 
>>> DD but I think my issue is concerning a set of small files (tens of 
>>> thousands nay more)…
>>>
>>> [root at nisus test]# ddt -t 10g /mnt/test/
>>> Writing to /mnt/test/ddt.8362 ... syncing ... done.
>>> sleeping 10 seconds ... done.
>>> Reading from /mnt/test/ddt.8362 ... done.
>>> 10240MiB    KiB/s  CPU%
>>> Write      114770     4
>>> Read        40675     4
>>>
>>> for info: /mnt/test concerns the single v2 GlFS volume
>>>
>>> [root at nisus test]# ddt -t 10g /mnt/fhgfs/
>>> Writing to /mnt/fhgfs/ddt.8380 ... syncing ... done.
>>> sleeping 10 seconds ... done.
>>> Reading from /mnt/fhgfs/ddt.8380 ... done.
>>> 10240MiB    KiB/s  CPU%
>>> Write      102591     1
>>> Read        98079     2
>>>
>>> Do you have a idea how to tune/optimize performance settings? and/or 
>>> TCP settings (MTU, etc.)?
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>> |             |  UNTAR  |   DU   |  FIND   |   TAR   |   RM   |
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>> | single      |  ~3m45s | ~43s |    ~47s |  ~3m10s | ~3m15s |
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>> | replicated  |  ~5m10s | ~59s |   ~1m6s |  ~1m19s | ~1m49s |
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>> | distributed |  ~4m18s | ~41s |    ~57s |  ~2m24s | ~1m38s |
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>> | dist-repl   |  ~8m18s | ~1m4s |  ~1m11s |  ~1m24s | ~2m40s |
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>> | native FS   |    ~11s | ~4s |     ~2s |    ~56s |   ~10s |
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>> | BeeGFS      |  ~3m43s | ~15s |     ~3s |  ~1m33s |   ~46s |
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>> | single (v2) |   ~3m6s | ~14s |    ~32s |   ~1m2s |   ~44s |
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>> for info:
>>> -BeeGFS is a distributed FS (4 bricks, 2 bricks per server and 2 
>>> servers)
>>> - single (v2): simple gluster volume with default settings
>>>
>>> I also note I obtain the same tar/untar performance issue with 
>>> FhGFS/BeeGFS but the rest (DU, FIND, RM) looks like to be OK.
>>>
>>> Thank you very much for your reply and help.
>>> Geoffrey
>>> -----------------------------------------------
>>> Geoffrey Letessier
>>>
>>> Responsable informatique & ingénieur système
>>> CNRS - UPR 9080 - Laboratoire de Biochimie Théorique
>>> Institut de Biologie Physico-Chimique
>>> 13, rue Pierre et Marie Curie - 75005 Paris
>>> Tel: 01 58 41 50 93 - eMail: geoffrey.letessier at cnrs.fr 
>>> <mailto:geoffrey.letessier at cnrs.fr>
>>>
>>> Le 2 juin 2015 à 21:53, Ben Turner <bturner at redhat.com 
>>> <mailto:bturner at redhat.com>> a écrit :
>>>
>>>> I am seeing problems on 3.7 as well.  Can you check 
>>>> /var/log/messages on both the clients and servers for hung tasks like:
>>>>
>>>> Jun  2 15:23:14 gqac006 kernel: "echo 0 > 
>>>> /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
>>>> Jun  2 15:23:14 gqac006 kernel: iozone        D 0000000000000001 
>>>>     0 21999      1 0x00000080
>>>> Jun  2 15:23:14 gqac006 kernel: ffff880611321cc8 0000000000000082 
>>>> ffff880611321c18 ffffffffa027236e
>>>> Jun  2 15:23:14 gqac006 kernel: ffff880611321c48 ffffffffa0272c10 
>>>> ffff88052bd1e040 ffff880611321c78
>>>> Jun  2 15:23:14 gqac006 kernel: ffff88052bd1e0f0 ffff88062080c7a0 
>>>> ffff880625addaf8 ffff880611321fd8
>>>> Jun  2 15:23:14 gqac006 kernel: Call Trace:
>>>> Jun  2 15:23:14 gqac006 kernel: [<ffffffffa027236e>] ? 
>>>> rpc_make_runnable+0x7e/0x80 [sunrpc]
>>>> Jun  2 15:23:14 gqac006 kernel: [<ffffffffa0272c10>] ? 
>>>> rpc_execute+0x50/0xa0 [sunrpc]
>>>> Jun  2 15:23:14 gqac006 kernel: [<ffffffff810aaa21>] ? 
>>>> ktime_get_ts+0xb1/0xf0
>>>> Jun  2 15:23:14 gqac006 kernel: [<ffffffff811242d0>] ? 
>>>> sync_page+0x0/0x50
>>>> Jun  2 15:23:14 gqac006 kernel: [<ffffffff8152a1b3>] 
>>>> io_schedule+0x73/0xc0
>>>> Jun  2 15:23:14 gqac006 kernel: [<ffffffff8112430d>] 
>>>> sync_page+0x3d/0x50
>>>> Jun  2 15:23:14 gqac006 kernel: [<ffffffff8152ac7f>] 
>>>> __wait_on_bit+0x5f/0x90
>>>> Jun  2 15:23:14 gqac006 kernel: [<ffffffff81124543>] 
>>>> wait_on_page_bit+0x73/0x80
>>>> Jun  2 15:23:14 gqac006 kernel: [<ffffffff8109eb80>] ? 
>>>> wake_bit_function+0x0/0x50
>>>> Jun  2 15:23:14 gqac006 kernel: [<ffffffff8113a525>] ? 
>>>> pagevec_lookup_tag+0x25/0x40
>>>> Jun  2 15:23:14 gqac006 kernel: [<ffffffff8112496b>] 
>>>> wait_on_page_writeback_range+0xfb/0x190
>>>> Jun  2 15:23:14 gqac006 kernel: [<ffffffff81124b38>] 
>>>> filemap_write_and_wait_range+0x78/0x90
>>>> Jun  2 15:23:14 gqac006 kernel: [<ffffffff811c07ce>] 
>>>> vfs_fsync_range+0x7e/0x100
>>>> Jun  2 15:23:14 gqac006 kernel: [<ffffffff811c08bd>] 
>>>> vfs_fsync+0x1d/0x20
>>>> Jun  2 15:23:14 gqac006 kernel: [<ffffffff811c08fe>] do_fsync+0x3e/0x60
>>>> Jun  2 15:23:14 gqac006 kernel: [<ffffffff811c0950>] 
>>>> sys_fsync+0x10/0x20
>>>> Jun  2 15:23:14 gqac006 kernel: [<ffffffff8100b072>] 
>>>> system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
>>>>
>>>> Do you see a perf problem with just a simple DD or do you need a 
>>>> more complex workload to hit the issue?  I think I saw an issue 
>>>> with metadata performance that I am trying to run down, let me know 
>>>> if you can see the problem with simple DD reads / writes or if we 
>>>> need to do some sort of dir / metadata access as well.
>>>>
>>>> -b
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: "Geoffrey Letessier" <geoffrey.letessier at cnrs.fr 
>>>>> <mailto:geoffrey.letessier at cnrs.fr>>
>>>>> To: "Pranith Kumar Karampuri" <pkarampu at redhat.com 
>>>>> <mailto:pkarampu at redhat.com>>
>>>>> Cc:gluster-users at gluster.org <mailto:gluster-users at gluster.org>
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 2, 2015 8:09:04 AM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] GlusterFS 3.7 - slow/poor performances
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Pranith,
>>>>>
>>>>> I’m sorry but I cannot bring you any comparison because comparison 
>>>>> will be
>>>>> distorted by the fact in my HPC cluster in production the network 
>>>>> technology
>>>>> is InfiniBand QDR and my volumes are quite different (brick in RAID6
>>>>> (12x2TB), 2 bricks per server and 4 servers into my pool)
>>>>>
>>>>> Concerning your demand, in attachments you can find all expected 
>>>>> results
>>>>> hoping it can help you to solve this serious performance issue 
>>>>> (maybe I need
>>>>> play with glusterfs parameters?).
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you very much by advance,
>>>>> Geoffrey
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Geoffrey Letessier
>>>>> Responsable informatique & ingénieur système
>>>>> UPR 9080 - CNRS - Laboratoire de Biochimie Théorique
>>>>> Institut de Biologie Physico-Chimique
>>>>> 13, rue Pierre et Marie Curie - 75005 Paris
>>>>> Tel: 01 58 41 50 93 - eMail: geoffrey.letessier at ibpc.fr 
>>>>> <mailto:geoffrey.letessier at ibpc.fr>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Le 2 juin 2015 à 10:09, Pranith Kumar Karampuri < 
>>>>> pkarampu at redhat.com <mailto:pkarampu at redhat.com> > a
>>>>> écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>> hi Geoffrey,
>>>>> Since you are saying it happens on all types of volumes, lets do the
>>>>> following:
>>>>> 1) Create a dist-repl volume
>>>>> 2) Set the options etc you need.
>>>>> 3) enable gluster volume profile using "gluster volume profile 
>>>>> <volname>
>>>>> start"
>>>>> 4) run the work load
>>>>> 5) give output of "gluster volume profile <volname> info"
>>>>>
>>>>> Repeat the steps above on new and old version you are comparing 
>>>>> this with.
>>>>> That should give us insight into what could be causing the slowness.
>>>>>
>>>>> Pranith
>>>>> On 06/02/2015 03:22 AM, Geoffrey Letessier wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a crash test cluster where i’ve tested the new version of 
>>>>> GlusterFS
>>>>> (v3.7) before upgrading my HPC cluster in production.
>>>>> But… all my tests show me very very low performances.
>>>>>
>>>>> For my benches, as you can read below, I do some actions (untar, 
>>>>> du, find,
>>>>> tar, rm) with linux kernel sources, dropping cache, each on 
>>>>> distributed,
>>>>> replicated, distributed-replicated, single (single brick) volumes 
>>>>> and the
>>>>> native FS of one brick.
>>>>>
>>>>> # time (echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches; tar xJf 
>>>>> ~/linux-4.1-rc5.tar.xz;
>>>>> sync; echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches)
>>>>> # time (echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches; du -sh linux-4.1-rc5/; 
>>>>> echo 3 >
>>>>> /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches)
>>>>> # time (echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches; find linux-4.1-rc5/|wc 
>>>>> -l; echo 3
>>>>>> /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches)
>>>>> # time (echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches; tar czf linux-4.1-rc5.tgz
>>>>> linux-4.1-rc5/; echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches)
>>>>> # time (echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches; rm -rf linux-4.1-rc5.tgz
>>>>> linux-4.1-rc5/; echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches)
>>>>>
>>>>> And here are the process times:
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> | | UNTAR | DU | FIND | TAR | RM |
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> | single | ~3m45s | ~43s | ~47s | ~3m10s | ~3m15s |
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> | replicated | ~5m10s | ~59s | ~1m6s | ~1m19s | ~1m49s |
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> | distributed | ~4m18s | ~41s | ~57s | ~2m24s | ~1m38s |
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> | dist-repl | ~8m18s | ~1m4s | ~1m11s | ~1m24s | ~2m40s |
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> | native FS | ~11s | ~4s | ~2s | ~56s | ~10s |
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> I get the same results, whether with default configurations with 
>>>>> custom
>>>>> configurations.
>>>>>
>>>>> if I look at the side of the ifstat command, I can note my IO 
>>>>> write processes
>>>>> never exceed 3MBs...
>>>>>
>>>>> EXT4 native FS seems to be faster (roughly 15-20% but no more) 
>>>>> than XFS one
>>>>>
>>>>> My [test] storage cluster config is composed by 2 identical 
>>>>> servers (biCPU
>>>>> Intel Xeon X5355, 8GB of RAM, 2x2TB HDD (no-RAID) and Gb ethernet)
>>>>>
>>>>> My volume settings:
>>>>> single: 1server 1 brick
>>>>> replicated: 2 servers 1 brick each
>>>>> distributed: 2 servers 2 bricks each
>>>>> dist-repl: 2 bricks in the same server and replica 2
>>>>>
>>>>> All seems to be OK in gluster status command line.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you have an idea why I obtain so bad results?
>>>>> Thanks in advance.
>>>>> Geoffrey
>>>>> -----------------------------------------------
>>>>> Geoffrey Letessier
>>>>>
>>>>> Responsable informatique & ingénieur système
>>>>> CNRS - UPR 9080 - Laboratoire de Biochimie Théorique
>>>>> Institut de Biologie Physico-Chimique
>>>>> 13, rue Pierre et Marie Curie - 75005 Paris
>>>>> Tel: 01 58 41 50 93 - eMail: geoffrey.letessier at cnrs.fr 
>>>>> <mailto:geoffrey.letessier at cnrs.fr>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users at gluster.org 
>>>>> <mailto:Gluster-users at gluster.org>
>>>>> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Gluster-users mailing list
>>>>> Gluster-users at gluster.org <mailto:Gluster-users at gluster.org>
>>>>> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users at gluster.org
> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20150609/ea45397f/attachment.html>


More information about the Gluster-users mailing list