LVS
lvs-users
Google
 
Web LinuxVirtualServer.org

RE: LVS performance bug

To: "Rudd, Michael" <Michael.Rudd@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: LVS performance bug
Cc: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing list." <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 10:56:56 +0200 (EET)
        Hello,

On Wed, 14 Mar 2007, Rudd, Michael wrote:

> Ran it again and here's what I see. We currently have 8 Gigs of memory
> installed. It doesn't appear from the "free" command that we ran
> completely out of memory. Heres what "free" and "slabinfo" say before
> the test. This is sitting idle. 

        I would suspect OPS, I'm not sure what patch you apply:

http://marc.info/?l=linux-virtual-server&m=115295228311142&w=2

> [root@jackets-a upgrade]# cat /proc/slabinfo
> slabinfo - version: 2.1
> # name            <active_objs> <num_objs> <objsize> <objperslab>
> <pagesperslab> : tunables <limit> <batchcount> <sharedfactor> : slabdata
> <active_slabs> <num_slabs> <sharedavail>
> ip_vs_conn        2774925 2774925    256   15    1 : tunables  120   60

...

> So the only thing I see shooting up higher in memory used is
> buffers/cache used seems to grow. But in the slabinfo the ip_vs_conn
> active objects grows fast. I watched it grow during the test from 39K
> objects to over 2 million objects. Maybe something isn't being reset or
> returned to the pool. We are running the OPS patch(one packet
> scheduling) because we are using LVS for the udp service DNS. I'm sure
> it treats connections differently than the regularly hashed connections
> thing. 
> 
> If you need anything else let me know. I have a reproducer now that
> makes it happen regularly. 
> 
> Mike

Regards

--
Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>