Re: High traffic NFS performance and availability problems
From: David Rice (drice_at_globat.com)
Date: 02/21/05
- Previous message: Joseph Koshy: "[hwpmc support] new code snapshot"
- In reply to: Robert Watson: "Re: High traffic NFS performance and availability problems"
- Next in thread: Eric Anderson: "Re: High traffic NFS performance and availability problems"
- Reply: Eric Anderson: "Re: High traffic NFS performance and availability problems"
- Reply: Robert Watson: "Re: High traffic NFS performance and availability problems"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 12:34:51 -0800
Here are the snapshots of the output you requested. These are from the NFS
server. We have just upgraded them to 5.3-RELEASE as so many have recomended.
Hope that makes them more stable. The performance still needs some attention.
Thank You
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D USERNAME PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE C TIME WCPU CPU COMMAND
4 users Load 5.28 19.37 28.00 Feb 21 12:18
Mem:KB REAL VIRTUAL VN PAGER SWAP PAGER
Tot Share Tot Share Free in out in out
Act 19404 2056 90696 3344 45216 count
All 1020204 4280 4015204 7424 pages
zfod Interrupts
Proc:r p d s w Csw Trp Sys Int Sof Flt cow 7226 total
5128 5 60861 3 14021584 9 152732 wire 4: sio0
23228 act 6: fdc0
30.2%Sys 11.8%Intr 0.0%User 0.0%Nice 58.0%Idl 803616 inact 128 8: rtc
| | | | | | | | | | 43556 cache 13: npx
===============++++++ 1660 free 15: ata
daefr 6358 16: bge
Namei Name-cache Dir-cache prcfr 1 17: bge
Calls hits % hits % react 18: mpt
1704 971 57 11 1 pdwak 19: mpt
5342 pdpgs 639 24: amr
Disks amrd0 da0 pass0 pass1 pass2 intrn 100 0: clk
KB/t 22.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 114288 buf
tps 602 0 0 0 0 510 dirtybuf
MB/s 13.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 70235 desiredvnodes
% busy 100 0 0 0 0 20543 numvnodes
7883 freevnodes
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
last pid: 10330; load averages: 14.69, 11.81, 18.62
up 0+09:01:13 12:32:57
226 processes: 5 running, 153 sleeping, 57 waiting, 11 lock
CPU states: 0.1% user, 0.0% nice, 66.0% system, 24.3% interrupt, 9.6% idle
Mem: 23M Active, 774M Inact, 150M Wired, 52M Cache, 112M Buf, 1660K Free
Swap: 1024M Total, 124K Used, 1024M Free
PID USERNAME PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE C TIME WCPU CPU COMMAND
63 root -44 -163 0K 12K WAIT 0 147:05 45.07% 45.07% swi1: net
30 root -68 -187 0K 12K WAIT 0 101:39 32.32% 32.32% irq16:
bge0
12 root 117 0 0K 12K CPU2 2 329:09 19.58% 19.58% idle: cpu2
11 root 116 0 0K 12K CPU3 3 327:29 19.24% 19.24% idle: cpu3
13 root 114 0 0K 12K RUN 1 263:39 16.89% 16.89% idle: cpu1
14 root 109 0 0K 12K CPU0 0 228:50 12.06% 12.06% idle: cpu0
368 root 4 0 1220K 740K *Giant 3 45:27 7.52% 7.52% nfsd
366 root 4 0 1220K 740K *Giant 0 48:52 7.28% 7.28% nfsd
364 root 4 0 1220K 740K *Giant 3 53:01 7.13% 7.13% nfsd
367 root -8 0 1220K 740K biord 3 41:22 7.08% 7.08% nfsd
372 root 4 0 1220K 740K *Giant 0 28:54 7.08% 7.08% nfsd
365 root -1 0 1220K 740K *Giant 3 51:53 6.93% 6.93% nfsd
370 root -1 0 1220K 740K nfsslp 0 32:49 6.84% 6.84% nfsd
369 root -8 0 1220K 740K biord 1 36:40 6.49% 6.49% nfsd
371 root 4 0 1220K 740K *Giant 0 25:14 6.45% 6.45% nfsd
374 root -1 0 1220K 740K nfsslp 2 22:31 6.45% 6.45% nfsd
377 root 4 0 1220K 740K *Giant 2 17:21 5.52% 5.52% nfsd
376 root -4 0 1220K 740K *Giant 2 15:45 5.37% 5.37% nfsd
373 root -4 0 1220K 740K ufs 3 19:38 5.18% 5.18% nfsd
378 root 4 0 1220K 740K *Giant 2 13:55 4.54% 4.54% nfsd
379 root -8 0 1220K 740K biord 3 12:41 4.49% 4.49% nfsd
380 root 4 0 1220K 740K - 2 11:26 4.20% 4.20% nfsd
3 root -8 0 0K 12K - 1 21:21 4.05% 4.05% g_up
4 root -8 0 0K 12K - 0 20:05 3.96% 3.96% g_down
381 root 4 0 1220K 740K - 3 9:28 3.66% 3.66% nfsd
382 root 4 0 1220K 740K - 1 10:13 3.47% 3.47% nfsd
385 root -1 0 1220K 740K nfsslp 3 7:21 3.17% 3.17% nfsd
38 root -64 -183 0K 12K *Giant 0 14:45 3.12% 3.12% irq24:
amr0
384 root 4 0 1220K 740K - 3 8:40 3.12% 3.12% nfsd
72 root -24 -143 0K 12K WAIT 2 16:50 2.98% 2.98% swi6:+
383 root -8 0 1220K 740K biord 2 7:57 2.93% 2.93% nfsd
389 root 4 0 1220K 740K - 2 5:31 2.64% 2.64% nfsd
390 root -8 0 1220K 740K biord 3 5:54 2.59% 2.59% nfsd
387 root -8 0 1220K 740K biord 0 6:40 2.54% 2.54% nfsd
386 root -8 0 1220K 740K biord 1 6:22 2.44% 2.44% nfsd
392 root 4 0 1220K 740K - 3 4:27 2.10% 2.10% nfsd
388 root -4 0 1220K 740K *Giant 2 4:45 2.05% 2.05% nfsd
395 root 4 0 1220K 740K - 0 3:59 2.05% 2.05% nfsd
391 root 4 0 1220K 740K - 2 5:10 1.95% 1.95% nfsd
393 root 4 0 1220K 740K sbwait 1 4:13 1.56% 1.56% nfsd
398 root 4 0 1220K 740K - 2 3:31 1.56% 1.56% nfsd
399 root 4 0 1220K 740K - 3 3:12 1.56% 1.56% nfsd
401 root 4 0 1220K 740K - 1 2:57 1.51% 1.51% nfsd
403 root 4 0 1220K 740K - 0 3:04 1.42% 1.42% nfsd
406 root 4 0 1220K 740K - 1 2:27 1.37% 1.37% nfsd
397 root 4 0 1220K 740K - 3 3:16 1.27% 1.27% nfsd
396 root 4 0 1220K 740K - 2 3:42 1.22% 1.22% nfsd
On Saturday 19 February 2005 04:23 am, Robert Watson wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Feb 2005, David Rice wrote:
> > Typicly we have 7 client boxes mounting storage from a single file
> > server. Each client box servers 1000 web sites and associate email. We
> > have done the basic NFS tuning (ie: Read write size optimization and
> > kernel tuning)
>
> How many nfsd's are you running with?
>
> If you run systat -vmstat 1 on your server under high load, could you send
> us the output? In particular, I'm interested in knowing how the system is
> spending its time, the paging level, I/O throughput on devices, and the
> systat -vmstat summary screen provides a good summary of this and more. A
> few snapshots of "gstat" output would also be very helpful. As would a
> snapshot or two of "top -S" output. This will give us a picture of how
> the system is spending its time.
>
> > 2. Client boxes have high load averages and sometimes crashes due to
> > slow NFS performance.
>
> Could you be more specific about the crash failure mode?
>
> > 3. File servers that randomly crash with "Fatal trap 12: page fault
> > while in kernel mode"
>
> Could you make sure you're running with at least the latest 5.3 patch
> level on the server, which includes some NFS server stability fixes, and
> also look at sliding to the head of 5-STABLE? There are a number of
> performance and stability improvements that may be relevant there.
>
> Could you provide serial console output of the full panic message, trap
> details, compile the kernel with KDB+DDB, and include a full stack trace?
> I'm happy to try to help debug these problems.
>
> > 4. With soft updates enabled during FSCK the fileserver will freeze with
> > all NFS processs in the "snaplck" state. We disabled soft updates
> > because of this.
>
> If it's possible to do get some more information, it would be quite
> helpful. In particular, could you compile the server box with
> DDB+KDB+BREAK_TO_DEBUGGER, breka into the serial debugger when it appears
> wedged, and put the contents of "show lockedvnods", "ps", and "trace
> <pid>" of any processes listed in "show lockedvnods" output, that would be
> great. A crash dump would also be very helpful. For some hints on the
> information that is necessary here, take a look at the handbook chapter on
> kernel debugging and reporting kernel bugs, and my recent post to current@
> diagnosing a similar bug.
>
> If you e-enable soft updates but leave bgfsck disabled, does that correct
> this stability problem?
>
> In any case, I'm happy to help try to figure out what's going on -- some
> of the above information for stability and performance problems would be
> quite helpful in tracking it down.
>
> Robert N M Watson
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
- Previous message: Joseph Koshy: "[hwpmc support] new code snapshot"
- In reply to: Robert Watson: "Re: High traffic NFS performance and availability problems"
- Next in thread: Eric Anderson: "Re: High traffic NFS performance and availability problems"
- Reply: Eric Anderson: "Re: High traffic NFS performance and availability problems"
- Reply: Robert Watson: "Re: High traffic NFS performance and availability problems"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
