Some general thoughts on “deadlocks” and automated deadlock detection.

I personally don’t like the term “deadlock” as it implies a condition that 
won’t ever resolve itself. In GPFS terms, a deadlock is really a “long RPC 
waiter” over a certain threshold. RPCs that wait on certain events can and do 
occur and they can take some time to complete. This is not necessarily a 
condition that is a problem, but you should be looking into them.

GPFS does have automated deadlock detection and collection, but in the early 
releases it was … well.. it’s not very “robust”. With later releases (4.2) it’s 
MUCH better. I personally don’t rely on it because in larger clusters it can be 
too aggressive and depending on what’s really going on it can make things 
worse. This statement is my opinion and it doesn’t mean it’s not a good thing 
to have. :-)

On the point of what commands to execute and what to collect – be careful about 
long running callback scripts and executing commands on other nodes. Depending 
on what the issues is, you could end up causing a deadlock or making it worse. 
Some basic data collection, local to the node with the long RPC waiter is a 
good thing. Test them well before deploying them. And make sure that you don’t 
conflict with the automated collections. (which you might consider turning off)

For my larger clusters, I dump the cluster waiters on a regular basis (once a 
minute: mmlsnode –N waiters –L), count the types and dump them into a database 
for graphing via Grafana. This doesn’t help me with true deadlock alerting, but 
it does give me insight into overall cluster behavior. If I see large numbers 
of long waiters I will (usually) go and investigate them on a cases by case 
basis. If you have large numbers of long RPC waiters on an ongoing basis, it's 
an indication of a larger problem that should be investigated. A few here and 
there is not a cause for real alarm in my experience.

Last – if you have a chance to upgrade to 4.1.1 or 4.2, I would encourage you 
to do so as the deadlock detection has improved quite a bit.

Bob Oesterlin
Sr Storage Engineer, Nuance HPC Grid
[email protected]

From: 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
 on behalf of Roland Pabel 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Organization: RRZK Uni Köln
Reply-To: gpfsug main discussion list 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 at 3:03 AM
To: gpfsug main discussion list 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: [gpfsug-discuss] Executing Callbacks on other Nodes

Hi everyone,

we are using GPFS 4.1.0.8 with 4 servers and 850 clients. Our GPFS setup is
fairly new, we are still in the testing phase. A few days ago, we had some
problems in the cluster which seemed to have started with deadlocks on a small
number of nodes. To be better prepared for this scenario, I would like to
install a callback for Event deadlockDetected. But this is a local event and
the callback is executed on the client nodes, from which I cannot even send an
email.

Is it possible using mm-commands to instead delegate the callback to the
servers (Nodeclass nsdNodes)?

I guess it would be possible to use a callback of the form "ssh nsd0
/root/bin/deadlock-callback.sh", but then it is contingent upon server nsd0
being available. The mm-command style "-N nsdNodes" would more reliable in my
opinion, because it would be run on all servers. On the servers, I can then
check to actually only execute the script on the cluster manager.

Thanks

Roland
--
Dr. Roland Pabel
Regionales Rechenzentrum der Universität zu Köln (RRZK)
Weyertal 121, Raum 3.07
D-50931 Köln

Tel.: +49 (221) 470-89589
E-Mail: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
_______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gpfsug.org_mailman_listinfo_gpfsug-2Ddiscuss&d=CwIFAw&c=djjh8EKwHtOepW4Bjau0lKhLlu-DxM1dlgP0rrLsOzY&r=LPDewt1Z4o9eKc86MXmhqX-45Cz1yz1ylYELF9olLKU&m=c7jzNm-H6SdZMztP1xkwgySivoe4FlOcI2pS2SCJ8K8&s=AfohxS7tz0ky5C8ImoufbQmQpdwpo4wEO7cSCzHPCD0&e=

_______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss

Reply via email to