From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Fri Sep 7 13:41:02 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A6E7FFB512 for ; Fri, 7 Sep 2018 13:41:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jakob@alvermark.net) Received: from out.alvermark.net (out.alvermark.net [185.34.136.138]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C6648A397; Fri, 7 Sep 2018 13:41:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jakob@alvermark.net) Received: from c-42bc70d5.06-431-73746f70.bbcust.telenor.se ([213.112.188.66] helo=mail.alvermark.net) by out.alvermark.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.91 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1fyH0H-000Lpz-LA; Fri, 07 Sep 2018 15:40:53 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alvermark.net; s=x; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=FHd0Ty1KEuNmsJ8CbLCqbGrdl4j5hTO2x2oIyNXiRIU=; b=xoqI37v4+sFveu0Nfcb6FQ6xjW pAhPV9+GKlGLH9FPXWbKnmeaAR4v+JEdZlGThxCIecehBgyB4YM2ByxpSYRvGPcfed1JEF1i5fbcU lRe2611ixtcwLq6Wj7FsWVRexkA+APvAs2fmKDywAFjMD3pnJ/Zn7bRjklBTTmprEVAXMwI2VNF2X Zo1czXFT5Fbw7UrlvVI1pj1Op+ulb+R4+lcEldS2PeAEDfo9YYEmMtJV+eSV+fFu5pCuWPWubV8sC XLGsFmq4w9gL/Ag+utwb92medUIeptbD8Ec3GLxGXcBf717ZmYILp8cFeUBuKddHZPi7T3EcAzaAZ eStTFtiQ==; Received: from [192.168.67.33] by mail.alvermark.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.91 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1fyH0G-0007EW-VB; Fri, 07 Sep 2018 15:40:52 +0200 Subject: Re: ZFS perfomance regression in FreeBSD 12 APLHA3->ALPHA4 To: Mark Johnston , Subbsd Cc: allanjude@freebsd.org, freebsd-current Current References: <20180906002825.GB77324@raichu> From: Jakob Alvermark Message-ID: <26c0f87e-2dd5-b088-8edb-0790b6b01ef0@alvermark.net> Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2018 15:40:52 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180906002825.GB77324@raichu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2018 13:41:02 -0000 On 9/6/18 2:28 AM, Mark Johnston wrote: > On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 11:15:03PM +0300, Subbsd wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 5:58 PM Allan Jude wrote: >>> On 2018-09-05 10:04, Subbsd wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I'm seeing a huge loss in performance ZFS after upgrading FreeBSD 12 >>>> to latest revision (r338466 the moment) and related to ARC. >>>> >>>> I can not say which revision was before except that the newver.sh >>>> pointed to ALPHA3. >>>> >>>> Problems are observed if you try to limit ARC. In my case: >>>> >>>> vfs.zfs.arc_max="128M" >>>> >>>> I know that this is very small. However, for two years with this there >>>> were no problems. >>>> >>>> When i send SIGINFO to process which is currently working with ZFS, i >>>> see "arc_reclaim_waiters_cv": >>>> >>>> e.g when i type: >>>> >>>> /bin/csh >>>> >>>> I have time (~5 seconds) to press several times 'ctrl+t' before csh is executed: >>>> >>>> load: 0.70 cmd: csh 5935 [arc_reclaim_waiters_cv] 1.41r 0.00u 0.00s 0% 3512k >>>> load: 0.70 cmd: csh 5935 [zio->io_cv] 1.69r 0.00u 0.00s 0% 3512k >>>> load: 0.70 cmd: csh 5935 [arc_reclaim_waiters_cv] 1.98r 0.00u 0.01s 0% 3512k >>>> load: 0.73 cmd: csh 5935 [arc_reclaim_waiters_cv] 2.19r 0.00u 0.01s 0% 4156k >>>> >>>> same story with find or any other commans: >>>> >>>> load: 0.34 cmd: find 5993 [zio->io_cv] 0.99r 0.00u 0.00s 0% 2676k >>>> load: 0.34 cmd: find 5993 [arc_reclaim_waiters_cv] 1.13r 0.00u 0.00s 0% 2676k >>>> load: 0.34 cmd: find 5993 [arc_reclaim_waiters_cv] 1.25r 0.00u 0.00s 0% 2680k >>>> load: 0.34 cmd: find 5993 [arc_reclaim_waiters_cv] 1.38r 0.00u 0.00s 0% 2684k >>>> load: 0.34 cmd: find 5993 [arc_reclaim_waiters_cv] 1.51r 0.00u 0.00s 0% 2704k >>>> load: 0.34 cmd: find 5993 [arc_reclaim_waiters_cv] 1.64r 0.00u 0.00s 0% 2716k >>>> load: 0.34 cmd: find 5993 [arc_reclaim_waiters_cv] 1.78r 0.00u 0.00s 0% 2760k >>>> >>>> this problem goes away after increasing vfs.zfs.arc_max >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list >>>> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current >>>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >>>> >>> Previously, ZFS was not actually able to evict enough dnodes to keep >>> your arc_max under 128MB, it would have been much higher based on the >>> number of open files you had. A recent improvement from upstream ZFS >>> (r337653 and r337660) was pulled in that fixed this, so setting an >>> arc_max of 128MB is much more effective now, and that is causing the >>> side effect of "actually doing what you asked it to do", in this case, >>> what you are asking is a bit silly. If you have a working set that is >>> greater than 128MB, and you ask ZFS to use less than that, it'll have to >>> constantly try to reclaim memory to keep under that very low bar. >>> >> Thanks for comments. Mark was right when he pointed to r338416 ( >> https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/head/sys/cddl/contrib/opensolaris/uts/common/fs/zfs/arc.c?r1=338416&r2=338415&pathrev=338416 >> ). Commenting aggsum_value returns normal speed regardless of the rest >> of the new code from upstream. >> I would like to repeat that the speed with these two lines is not just >> slow, but _INCREDIBLY_ slow! Probably, this should be written in the >> relevant documentation for FreeBSD 12+ Hi, I am experiencing the same slowness when there is a bit of load on the system (buildworld for example) which I haven't seen before. I have vfs.zfs.arc_max=2G. Top is reporting ARC: 607M Total, 140M MFU, 245M MRU, 1060K Anon, 4592K Header, 217M Other      105M Compressed, 281M Uncompressed, 2.67:1 Ratio Should I test the patch? Jakob > Could you please retest with the patch below applied, instead of > reverting r338416? > > diff --git a/sys/cddl/contrib/opensolaris/uts/common/fs/zfs/arc.c b/sys/cddl/contrib/opensolaris/uts/common/fs/zfs/arc.c > index 2bc065e12509..9b039b7d4a96 100644 > --- a/sys/cddl/contrib/opensolaris/uts/common/fs/zfs/arc.c > +++ b/sys/cddl/contrib/opensolaris/uts/common/fs/zfs/arc.c > @@ -538,7 +538,7 @@ typedef struct arc_state { > */ > int zfs_arc_meta_prune = 10000; > unsigned long zfs_arc_dnode_limit_percent = 10; > -int zfs_arc_meta_strategy = ARC_STRATEGY_META_BALANCED; > +int zfs_arc_meta_strategy = ARC_STRATEGY_META_ONLY; > int zfs_arc_meta_adjust_restarts = 4096; > > /* The 6 states: */ > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"