Thank you for your fast reply, Aaron I'm using Giga Ethernet to synchronize data between to our fail-over node. Is there something wrong ? Tell me, please
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 10:35 AM, Aaron Knister <[email protected]>wrote: > My best guess (and please correct me if I'm wrong) is that those messages > are because the underlying block devices are slow to respond to i/o > requests. It looks like you're using DRBD. What's your interconnect? > > On Jan 24, 2010, at 9:42 PM, Lex wrote: > > Hi list > > I have one OSS with hadware info like this : > > CPU Intel(R) xeon E5420 2.5 Ghz > Chipset intel 5000P > 8GB RAM > > With this OSS, we using 2 RAID-5 arrays as OSTs ( each has 4 x 1.5 TB hard > drive with RAID controller adaptec 5805 ) > > I worked quite smooth before, but, about 2 weeks ago, in /var/log/messages, > i saw many warning ( i thought so) like this: > > *Jan 25 08:41:23 OST6 kernel: Lustre: > 9587:0:(filter_io_26.c:706:filter_commitrw_write()) lustre-OST0006: slow > direct_io 35s > Jan 25 08:41:34 OST6 kernel: Lustre: > 9608:0:(filter_io_26.c:706:filter_commitrw_write()) lustre-OST0006: slow > direct_io 41s > Jan 25 08:41:34 OST6 kernel: Lustre: > 9608:0:(filter_io_26.c:706:filter_commitrw_write()) Skipped 2 previous > similar messages > Jan 25 08:41:35 OST6 kernel: Lustre: > 9645:0:(filter_io_26.c:706:filter_commitrw_write()) lustre-OST0006: slow > direct_io 43s > Jan 25 08:58:10 OST6 kernel: Lustre: > 9646:0:(filter_io_26.c:706:filter_commitrw_write()) lustre-OST0006: slow > direct_io 31s > Jan 25 08:59:39 OST6 kernel: Lustre: > 9609:0:(filter_io_26.c:706:filter_commitrw_write()) lustre-OST0006: slow > direct_io 30s > Jan 25 09:01:05 OST6 kernel: Lustre: > 9587:0:(filter_io_26.c:706:filter_commitrw_write()) lustre-OST0006: slow > direct_io 33s > Jan 25 09:03:23 OST6 kernel: Lustre: > 9633:0:(filter_io_26.c:706:filter_commitrw_write()) lustre-OST0006: slow > direct_io 32s > Jan 25 09:11:25 OST6 kernel: Lustre: > 9585:0:(filter_io_26.c:706:filter_commitrw_write()) lustre-OST0006: slow > direct_io 36s* > > I googled around and found that it's because a problem with oss_num_threads > and even though brought it down to 64 ( followed by the function i found in > the 1.8 manual: thread_number = RAM * CPU core / 128 MB, its value is 256 ) > > > *options ost oss_num_threads=64* > > It still didn't help. > > I thought it was only the harmless warning but maybe wrong, our performance > is goes down quite heavily ( it's maybe because of other reason, but for > now, i am only doubting slow direct_io problem ) > > iostat -m 1 1 > Linux 2.6.18-92.1.17.el5_lustre.1.8.0custom (OST6) 01/25/2010 > > avg-cpu: %user %nice %system %iowait %steal %idle > 0.01 0.02 2.86 25.01 0.00 72.10 > > Device: tps MB_read/s MB_wrtn/s MB_read MB_wrtn > sda 1.30 0.01 0.00 11386 3469 > sdb 1.30 0.01 0.00 11531 3469 > sdc 131.50 *12.40* 0.26 11793218 249934 > sdd 178.46 *18.00* 0.26 17124065 250334 > md2 3.33 0.02 0.00 22915 2634 > md1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 > md0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 > drbd3 480.10 *12.39* 0.26 11789047 249639 > drbd6 565.85 *14.89* 0.26 14168452 249211 > > > So, could anyone please tell me whether it's warning impact our system > performance or not ? and if it does, give me solution or advice to resolve > it, please > > Best regards > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Lustre-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss > > >
_______________________________________________ Lustre-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
