** Changed in: zfs
Status: New => Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1567557
Title:
Performance degradation of "zfs clone"
To manage notifications about this bug go t
This bug was fixed in the package zfs-linux - 0.6.5.6-0ubuntu18
---
zfs-linux (0.6.5.6-0ubuntu18) xenial; urgency=medium
* Improve cloning performance for large numbers of clones (LP: #1567557)
Bump zcmd buffer from 16K to 256K.
* Correctly install libraries such as libnvpair.
As per comment #24, considering the upload to be tested for zesty as
well ^
** Tags added: verification-done-zesty
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1567557
Title:
Performance degradati
This bug was fixed in the package zfs-linux - 0.6.5.9-5ubuntu4.2
---
zfs-linux (0.6.5.9-5ubuntu4.2) zesty; urgency=medium
* Improve cloning performance for large numbers of clones (LP: #1567557)
Bump zcmd buffer from 16K to 256K.
-- Colin Ian King Thu, 10 Aug 2017 13:48:11
+
@Brian, Yes indeed I have performed exhaustive testing on this on
Xenial, Zesty, Artful. A full exhaustive test takes 5 hours and I have
performed the upgrade steps and checked this out.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
Has this also been verified with Ubuntu 17.04? While its unlikely people
are upgrading from 16.04 to 17.04 it is an upgrade path and we should
ensure this fix does not regress and release these updates together.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which
** No longer affects: lxd (Ubuntu Xenial)
** No longer affects: lxd (Ubuntu Zesty)
** No longer affects: lxd (Ubuntu Artful)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1567557
Title:
Performanc
** No longer affects: lxd (Ubuntu)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1567557
Title:
Performance degradation of "zfs clone"
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.lau
Tested with zfs 0.6.5.6-0ubuntu18 on Xenial. Passes zfs smoke tests. The
performance increase on Xenial is not so significant than later
releases, but I'm seeing double digit % increase in performance with a
test of 3000 clones.
** Tags added: verification-done-xenial
--
You received this bug no
Hello Stéphane, or anyone else affected,
Accepted zfs-linux into xenial-proposed. The package will build now and
be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/zfs-
linux/0.6.5.6-0ubuntu18 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed
repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
Hello Stéphane, or anyone else affected,
Accepted zfs-linux into zesty-proposed. The package will build now and
be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/zfs-
linux/0.6.5.9-5ubuntu4.2 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed
repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
** Description changed:
+ [SRU Justification]
+
+ Creating tens of hundreds of clones can be prohibitively slow. The
+ underlying mechanism to gather clone information is using a 16K buffer
+ which limits performance. Also, the initial assumption is to pass in
+ zero sized buffer to the underl
** Changed in: zfs-linux (Ubuntu Xenial)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Colin Ian King (colin-king)
** Changed in: zfs-linux (Ubuntu Zesty)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Colin Ian King (colin-king)
** Changed in: zfs-linux (Ubuntu Zesty)
Status: New => In Progress
** Changed in: zfs-linu
This bug was fixed in the package zfs-linux - 0.6.5.11-1ubuntu2
---
zfs-linux (0.6.5.11-1ubuntu2) artful; urgency=medium
* Improve cloning performance for large numbers of clones (LP: #1567557)
Bump zcmd buffer from 16K to 256K.
-- Colin Ian King Tue, 8 Aug 2017 17:19:21
+01
I've bumped up the zcmd size to reduce the double ioctl() calls and
we're seeing 25-40% improvement clones > 1000. This is an interim fix
until we get a better fix from upstream. I'm going to SRU this once
we're OK with it in Arful. Attached are the new benchmarks.
** Attachment added: "Updated
** Also affects: zfs-linux (Ubuntu Artful)
Importance: Low
Assignee: Colin Ian King (colin-king)
Status: Triaged
** Also affects: lxd (Ubuntu Artful)
Importance: High
Status: Confirmed
** Also affects: zfs-linux (Ubuntu Xenial)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Summary changed:
- Performance degradation of "zfs clone" when under load
+ Performance degradation of "zfs clone"
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1567557
Title:
Performance degrad
** Changed in: zfs
Status: Unknown => New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1567557
Title:
Performance degradation of "zfs clone" when under load
To manage notifications about th
Based on measurements, we get a x^3 polynomial in clone time. Sub 2000
clones it's not too bad, but over 2000 clones the delay in the ioctl()
ramps up pretty quickly. I've got a fairly solid set of stats and drew
some estimates based on the trend line. See attached datasheet.
** Attachment adde
Running strace against zfs create I see the following ioctl() taking the
time:
1500475028.118005 ioctl(3, _IOC(0, 0x5a, 0x12, 0x00), 0x7ffc7c2184f0) = -1
ENOMEM (Cannot allocate memory) <0.390093>
1500475028.508153 mmap(NULL, 290816, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE,
MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) = 0x7f
So compound that with the huge amount of CPU suckage I'm seeing with
lxd...
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1567557
Title:
Performance degradation of "zfs clone" when under load
To ma
(but doing something pretty similar to what LXD does internally as far
as clones and mountpoint handling)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1567557
Title:
Performance degradation of "zfs
I'm seeing similar performance degradation on xenial except that the
server I used seems to be pretty slow to start with too:
root@athos:~# sh test.sh
Creating 100 clones
Took: 11 seconds (9/s)
Creating 200 clones
Took: 46 seconds (4/s)
Creating 400 clones
Took: 297 seconds (1/s)
--
You receive
That's pure ZFS completely outside of LXD.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1567557
Title:
Performance degradation of "zfs clone" when under load
To manage notifications about this bug
Creating 100 clones
Took: 4 seconds (25/s)
Creating 200 clones
Took: 13 seconds (15/s)
Creating 400 clones
Took: 46 seconds (8/s)
Creating 600 clones
Took: 156 seconds (3/s)
```
#!/bin/sh
zfs destroy -R castiana/testzfs
rm -Rf /tmp/testzfs
zfs create castiana/testzfs -o mountpoint=none
zfs snaps
Looks like there is a lot of contention on a futex and the underlying
database too. Perf record and perf report can show that most of the
issues are more to do with lxd, database and futex lock contention. Once
these are resolved, I'll be happy to re-analyze the entire ZFS + lxd
stack, but I believ
Running health-check against lxd I see that there is a lot of contention
on a futex and a load of context switches going on in lxd.
** Attachment added: "output from health-check when examining lxd"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lxd/+bug/1567557/+attachment/4909747/+files/health
I've now compared ZFS with BTRFS and the overall CPU load profile from
lxd in both scenarios is surprisingly similar - lxd is eating a lot of
CPU and I think there is an underlying issue there rather than a
massively broken performance issue with ZFS.
See the attached data sheet; the CPU consumpti
After a load tests, I've found the same anomaly with btrfs. I'm using a
80GB btrfs raw device, 16GB memory, 16 CPU threads:
BTRFS:
Time
24.02632
54.58464
125.520 128
272.835 256
809.038 512
3451.172 1024
So the pinch point happens later than with ZFS, but there seems to
Most of the CPU being consumed is in strcmp()
- 99.39% 0.00% zfs[kernel.kallsyms] [k] zfsdev_ioctl
▒
- 99.39% zfsdev_ioctl
I've created 4096 zfs clones using the same commands that lxd is using
and I have observed that the biggest pinch point is when fetching the
zfs clone stats as this has to lock using dsl_dataset_hold_obj, fetch
the data and then unlock with dsl_dataset_rele. Traversing hundreds of
clones is linear
Our test machines aren't particularly impressive, just 12GB of RAM or so.
Note that as can be seen above, we're using Alpine (busybox) images rather than
Ubuntu to limit the resource usage and get us to a lot more containers per
system.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a me
I'm trying to remember if we had to bump any of the sysctls to actually
reach 1024 containers, I don't think any of the usual suspects would be
in play until you reach 2000+ Alpine containers though.
If you do run out of some kernel resources, you can try applying the following
sysctls to get you
I've tried to reproduce this but when I pass more than 256 containers I
run out of resources. What kind of configuration are you using to test
this. Once I can reproduce this I'll try and see what the performance
constraint is.
** Changed in: zfs-linux (Ubuntu)
Status: In Progress => Incom
** Changed in: zfs-linux (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided => Medium
** Changed in: zfs-linux (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Colin Ian King (colin-king)
** Changed in: zfs-linux (Ubuntu)
Status: New => In Progress
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
Since you've already filed one bug report upstream, would you be
interested in filing this one upstream? I can certainly copy-and-paste
it upstream, but it seems like it'd be better to have it come from you.
I don't know anything about LXD. (I'm just trying to help out with ZoL
bug reports.)
--
Y
36 matches
Mail list logo