On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 07:16:56 -0700 Cy Schubert <cy.schub...@komquats.com> wrote:
> In message <20160409105444.7020f2f1.ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de>, "O. > Hartmann" > writes: > > --Sig_/SqWr.x1C_BgJVIYh7m_9T5y > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > > > Am Mon, 04 Apr 2016 23:46:08 -0700 > > Cy Schubert <cy.schub...@komquats.com> schrieb: > > > > > In message > > > <20160405082047.670d7...@freyja.zeit4.iv.bundesimmobilien.de>,= > > =20 > > > "O. H > > > artmann" writes: > > > > On Sat, 02 Apr 2016 16:14:57 -0700 > > > > Cy Schubert <cy.schub...@komquats.com> wrote: > > > > =20 > > > > > In message <20160402231955.41b05526.ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de>, > > > > > "O.= > > =20 > > > > > Hartmann" > > > > > writes: =20 > > > > > > --Sig_/eJJPtbrEuK1nN2zIpc7BmVr > > > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DUS-ASCII > > > > > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > Am Sat, 2 Apr 2016 11:39:10 +0200 > > > > > > "O. Hartmann" <ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de> schrieb: > > > > > > =20 > > > > > > > Am Sat, 2 Apr 2016 10:55:03 +0200 > > > > > > > "O. Hartmann" <ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de> schrieb: > > > > > > >=3D20 =20 > > > > > > > > Am Sat, 02 Apr 2016 01:07:55 -0700 > > > > > > > > Cy Schubert <cy.schub...@komquats.com> schrieb: > > > > > > > > =3D20 =20 > > > > > > > > > In message <56f6c6b0.6010...@protected-networks.net>, > > > > > > > > > Michael= > > Butle =20 > > > > r =20 > > > > > > > > > =3D =20 > > > > > > writes: =3D20 =20 > > > > > > > > > > -current is not great for interactive use at all. The > > > > > > > > > > strat= > > egy of > > > > > > > > > > pre-emptively dropping idle processes to swap is > > > > > > > > > > hurting ..= > > big > > > > > > > > > > tim=3D =20 > > > > > > e. =3D20 =20 > > > > > > > > >=3D20 > > > > > > > > > FreeBSD doesn't "preemptively" or arbitrarily push pages out > > > > > > > > > = > > to > > > > > > > > > disk.=3D =20 > > > > > > LRU=3D20 =20 > > > > > > > > > doesn't do this. > > > > > > > > > =3D20 =20 > > > > > > > > > >=3D20 > > > > > > > > > > Compare inactive memory to swap in this example .. > > > > > > > > > >=3D20 > > > > > > > > > > 110 processes: 1 running, 108 sleeping, 1 zombie > > > > > > > > > > CPU: 1.2% user, 0.0% nice, 4.3% system, 0.0% > > > > > > > > > > interrupt,= > > 94.5% > > > > > > > > > > i=3D =20 > > > > > > dle =20 > > > > > > > > > > Mem: 474M Active, 1609M Inact, 764M Wired, 281M Buf, 119M > > > > > > > > > > F= > > ree > > > > > > > > > > Swap: 4096M Total, 917M Used, 3178M Free, 22% Inuse > > > > > > > > > > =3D= > > 20 =20 > > > > > > > > >=3D20 > > > > > > > > > To analyze this you need to capture vmstat output. You'll > > > > > > > > > see= > > the > > > > > > > > > fre=3D =20 > > > > > > e pool=3D20 =20 > > > > > > > > > dip below a threshold and pages go out to disk in response. > > > > > > > > > I= > > f you > > > > > > > > > ha=3D =20 > > > > > > ve=3D20 =20 > > > > > > > > > daemons with small working sets, pages that are not part of > > > > > > > > > t= > > he > > > > > > > > > worki=3D =20 > > > > > > ng=3D20 =20 > > > > > > > > > sets for daemons or applications will eventually be paged > > > > > > > > > out= > > . This > > > > > > > > > i=3D =20 > > > > > > s not=3D20 =20 > > > > > > > > > a bad thing. In your example above, the 281 MB of UFS > > > > > > > > > buffers= > > are > > > > > > > > > mor=3D =20 > > > > > > e=3D20 =20 > > > > > > > > > active than the 917 MB paged out. If it's paged out and > > > > > > > > > never= > > used > > > > > > > > > ag=3D =20 > > > > > > ain,=3D20 =20 > > > > > > > > > then it doesn't hurt. However the 281 MB of buffers saves > > > > > > > > > you= > > I/O. > > > > > > > > > Th=3D =20 > > > > > > e=3D20 =20 > > > > > > > > > inactive pages are part of your free pool that were active > > > > > > > > > at= > > one > > > > > > > > > tim=3D =20 > > > > > > e but=3D20 =20 > > > > > > > > > now are not. They may be reclaimed and if they are, you've > > > > > > > > > ju= > > st > > > > > > > > > saved=3D =20 > > > > > > more=3D20 =20 > > > > > > > > > I/O. > > > > > > > > >=3D20 > > > > > > > > > Top is a poor tool to analyze memory use. Vmstat is the > > > > > > > > > bette= > > r tool > > > > > > > > > t=3D =20 > > > > > > o help=3D20 =20 > > > > > > > > > understand memory use. Inactive memory isn't a bad thing per > > > > > > > > > = > > se. > > > > > > > > > Moni=3D =20 > > > > > > tor=3D20 =20 > > > > > > > > > page outs, scan rate and page reclaims. > > > > > > > > >=3D20 > > > > > > > > > =3D20 =20 > > > > > > > >=3D20 > > > > > > > > I give up! Tried to check via ssh/vmstat what is going on. > > > > > > > > Last= > > lines > > > > > > > > b=3D =20 > > > > > > efore broken =20 > > > > > > > > pipe: > > > > > > > >=3D20 > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > procs memory page disks faults > > > > > > > > = > > =20 > > > > cpu =20 > > > > > > > > r b w avm fre flt re pi po fr sr ad0 ad1 in > > > > > > > > s= > > y c =20 > > > > s =20 > > > > > > > > =3D =20 > > > > > > us sy id =20 > > > > > > > > 22 0 22 5.8G 1.0G 46319 0 0 0 55721 1297 0 4 219 > > > > > > > > 23= > > 907 > > > > > > > > 540=3D =20 > > > > > > 0 95 5 0 =20 > > > > > > > > 22 0 22 5.4G 1.3G 51733 0 0 0 72436 1162 0 0 108 > > > > > > > > 40= > > 869 > > > > > > > > 345=3D =20 > > > > > > 9 93 7 0 =20 > > > > > > > > 15 0 22 12G 1.2G 54400 0 27 0 52188 1160 0 42 148 > > > > > > > > 52= > > 192 > > > > > > > > 436=3D =20 > > > > > > 6 91 9 0 =20 > > > > > > > > 14 0 22 12G 1.0G 44954 0 37 0 37550 1179 0 39 141 > > > > > > > > 86= > > 209 > > > > > > > > 436=3D =20 > > > > > > 8 88 12 0 =20 > > > > > > > > 26 0 22 12G 1.1G 60258 0 81 0 69459 1119 0 27 123 > > > > > > > > 77= > > 9569 > > > > > > > > 704=3D =20 > > > > > > 359 87 13 0 =20 > > > > > > > > 29 3 22 13G 774M 50576 0 68 0 32204 1304 0 2 102 > > > > > > > > 50= > > 7337 > > > > > > > > 484=3D =20 > > > > > > 861 93 7 0 =20 > > > > > > > > 27 0 22 13G 937M 47477 0 48 0 59458 1264 3 2 112 > > > > > > > > 68= > > 131 > > > > > > > > 4440=3D =20 > > > > > > 7 95 5 0 =20 > > > > > > > > 36 0 22 13G 829M 83164 0 2 0 82575 1225 1 0 126 > > > > > > > > 99= > > 366 > > > > > > > > 3806=3D =20 > > > > > > 0 89 11 0 =20 > > > > > > > > 35 0 22 6.2G 1.1G 98803 0 13 0 121375 1217 2 8 112 > > > > > > > > 9= > > 9371 > > > > > > > > 49=3D =20 > > > > > > 99 85 15 0 =20 > > > > > > > > 34 0 22 13G 723M 54436 0 20 0 36952 1276 0 17 153 > > > > > > > > 29= > > 142 > > > > > > > > 443=3D =20 > > > > > > 1 95 5 0 =20 > > > > > > > > Fssh_packet_write_wait: Connection to 192.168.0.1 port 22: > > > > > > > > Brok= > > en pip =20 > > > > e =20 > > > > > > > >=3D20 > > > > > > > >=3D20 > > > > > > > > This makes this crap system completely unusable. The server > > > > > > > > (Fr= > > eeBSD > > > > > > > > 11=3D =20 > > > > > > .0-CURRENT #20 =20 > > > > > > > > r297503: Sat Apr 2 09:02:41 CEST 2016 amd64) in question did > > > > > > > > poudriere=3D =20 > > > > > > bulk job. I =20 > > > > > > > > can not even determine what terminal goes down first - another > > > > > > > > = > > one, > > > > > > > > muc=3D =20 > > > > > > h more time =20 > > > > > > > > idle than the one shwoing the "vmstat 5" output, is still > > > > > > > > alive= > > !=3D20 > > > > > > > >=3D20 > > > > > > > > i consider this a serious bug and it is no benefit what > > > > > > > > happene= > > d sinc =20 > > > > e =20 > > > > > > > > =3D =20 > > > > > > this "fancy" =20 > > > > > > > > update. :-( =3D20 =20 > > > > > > >=3D20 > > > > > > > By the way - it might be of interest and some hint. > > > > > > >=3D20 > > > > > > > One of my boxes is acting as server and gateway. It utilises > > > > > > > NAT,= > > IPFW, > > > > > > > w=3D =20 > > > > > > hen it is under =20 > > > > > > > high load, as it was today, sometimes passing the network flow > > > > > > > fr= > > om ISP > > > > > > > i=3D =20 > > > > > > nto the network =20 > > > > > > > for clients is extremely slow. I do not consider this the reason > > > > > > > = > > for > > > > > > > coll=3D =20 > > > > > > apsing ssh =20 > > > > > > > sessions, since this incident happens also under no-load, but in > > > > > > > = > > the > > > > > > > over=3D =20 > > > > > > all-view onto =20 > > > > > > > the problem, this could be a hint - I hope.=3D20 =20 > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > I just checked on one box, that "broke pipe" very quickly after I > > > > > > s= > > tarted =20 > > > > p=3D =20 > > > > > > oudriere, > > > > > > while it did well a couple of hours before until the pipe broke. > > > > > > It= > > seems =20 > > > > i=3D =20 > > > > > > t's load > > > > > > dependend when the ssh session gets wrecked, but more important, > > > > > > af= > > ter th =20 > > > > e =3D =20 > > > > > > long-haul > > > > > > poudriere run, I rebooted the box and tried again with the > > > > > > mentione= > > d brok =20 > > > > en=3D =20 > > > > > > pipe after a > > > > > > couple of minutes after poudriere ran. Then I left the box for > > > > > > seve= > > ral ho =20 > > > > ur=3D =20 > > > > > > s and logged > > > > > > in again and checked the swap. Although there was for hours no > > > > > > load= > > or ot =20 > > > > he=3D =20 > > > > > > r pressure, > > > > > > there were 31% of of swap used - still (box has 16 GB of RAM and > > > > > > is= > > prope =20 > > > > ll=3D =20 > > > > > > ed by a XEON > > > > > > E3-1245 V2). > > > > > > =20 > > > > >=20 > > > > > 31%! Is it *actively* paging or is the 31% previously paged out and > > > > > n= > > o=20 > > > > > paging is *currently* being experienced? 31% of how swap space in > > > > > tot= > > al? > > > > >=20 > > > > > Also, what does ps aumx or ps aumxww say? Pipe it to head -40 or > > > > > simi= > > lar. > > > > >=20 > > > > > =20 > > > >=20 > > > > On FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT #4 r297573: Tue Apr 5 07:01:19 CEST 2016 > > > > amd64= > > , loca > > > > l > > > > network, no NAT. Stuck ssh session in the middle of administering and > > > > l= > > eaving > > > > the console/ssh session for a couple of minutes: > > > >=20 > > > > root 2064 0.0 0.1 91416 8492 - Is 07:18 0:00.03 > > > > ssh= > > d: > > > > hartmann [priv] (sshd) > > > >=20 > > > > hartmann 2108 0.0 0.1 91416 8664 - I 07:18 0:07.33 > > > > ssh= > > d: > > > > hartmann@pts/0 (sshd) > > > >=20 > > > > root 72961 0.0 0.1 91416 8496 - Is 08:11 0:00.03 > > > > ssh= > > d: > > > > hartmann [priv] (sshd) > > > >=20 > > > > hartmann 72970 0.0 0.1 91416 8564 - S 08:11 0:00.02 > > > > ssh= > > d: > > > > hartmann@pts/1 (sshd) > > > >=20 > > > > The situation is worse and i consider this a serious bug. > > > > =20 > > >=20 > > > There's not a lot to go on here. Do you have physical access to the > > > machi= > > ne=20 > > > to pop into DDB and take a look? You did say you're using a lot of > > > swap.= > > =20 > > > IIRC 30%. You didn't answer how much 30% was of. Without more data I > > > can'= > > t=20 > > > help you. At the best I can take wild guesses but that won't help you. > > > Tr= > > y=20 > > > to answer the questions I asked last week and we can go further. Until > > > th= > > en=20 > > > all we can do is wildly guess. > > >=20 > > >=20 > > > > Apologies for the late answer, I'm busy. > > That happens. > > > > > Well, The "homebox" is physical accessible as well as the systems at work, = > > but at work > > they are heavily used right now. > > > > As you stated in your prior to this Email, I "overload" the boxes. Yes, I d= > > o this by > > intention and FreeBSD CURRENT withstood those attacks - approximately until= > > 3 or 4 weeks > > ago, when these problems occured. > > > > 30% swap was the "remain" after I started poudriere, poudriere "died" due t= > > o a > > lost/broken pipe ssh session and did not relax after hours! The box didn't = > > do anything in > > that time after the pipe was broken. So I mentioned this.=20 > > > > You also mentioned UFS and ZFS concurrency. Yes, I use a mixed system. UFS = > > for the > > system's partitions, and ZFS for the data volumes. UFS is on SSDs "faster",= > > but this is > > only a subjective impression of mine. Having /usr/ports on UFS and ZFS and = > > enough memory > > (32 GB RAM) shows significant differences on the very same HDD drive: while= > > UFS has > > finished a "matured" svn tree, the ZFS based tree could take up to 5 or 6 m= > > inutes until > > finished. I think this is due to the growing .svn-folder. But on ZFS this o= > > ccurs only the > > first time the update of /usr/ports is done. > > > > Just to say: if UFS and ZFS coexistency is critical, this is defintely a mu= > > st for the > > handbook! > > I don't think so. Otherwise we should also write that running too many > applications will cause paging. It's like saying, when running large Oracle > databases don't make the SGA larger than physical memory. It's common sense. > > > > > But on the other hand, what I complain about is a dramatically change in st= > > ability of > > CURRENT since the first occurency of the reported problems. Before, the ver= > > y same > > hardware, the very same setup, the very same jobs performed well. I pushed = > > the boxes with > > poudriere and several scientific jobs to their limits, and they took it lik= > > e a German > > tank.=20 > > > > By the way, I use csh in all scenarios - I do not know whether this helps. > > I think I read somewhere that csh had an issue where it died under certain > circumstances. I for the life of me can't find the email any more. It was a > commit log email. Try /bin/sh as a test. > > By the way, I tried /bin/sh. The same issue! _______________________________________________ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
