From nobody Thu May 26 03:37:48 2022 X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DDFC1B3C598 for ; Thu, 26 May 2022 03:37:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jwd@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [96.47.72.132]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "freefall.freebsd.org", Issuer "R3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4L7ttN1ZH6z3jDd; Thu, 26 May 2022 03:37:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jwd@freebsd.org) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=freebsd.org; s=dkim; t=1653536268; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Z/Nbtqh5/8GcBdKHSWX33N88I4Eu2gx303vbu/lnlqE=; b=fpz285bQlmfGSiaZEjjT3yCWqOE7j9JSd1W9ZZAckUZ1KZOsIS3V1DrauLmZoyF4tXMX7a Cvn8SCmfW9YZlYLrafUrvVm+d/aBNklAfb3ZzzIORvfcWPIOrD7nqob6PPI8q8y2Gwmktf Tlw1gMs31VSQlnOvDMKJGzMTkD4W9sFfu5Exe9U7SqO6N9IYiWulB+vqFsvZIb8evH5eXM 1hnEsTSU641K8KEU3SG/d64shfbW0J9/8lZAVwNz2NosjD4carIsMlbCNxpUHdBvgvmJyY BU2TYZylpbS3CB1nWLhB0ODH9JmebwSt88xLkInraipbCGDFzqSQuip8Yhuebw== Received: by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 821) id 1FA4E1ADC1; Thu, 26 May 2022 03:37:48 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 26 May 2022 03:37:48 +0000 From: John To: Adam Stylinski Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, Rick Macklem Subject: Re: zfs/nfsd performance limiter Message-ID: References: List-Id: Filesystems List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-fs List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=freebsd.org; s=dkim; t=1653536268; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Z/Nbtqh5/8GcBdKHSWX33N88I4Eu2gx303vbu/lnlqE=; b=YS3s/9VOF0NpZmA2QXeP24+WX7JxcmC0Hm1BwSiHP0clDbiFriv7IdqYfr+buroeToayYr uDSeii69jq6n34yfPE+gOc2mRo6C7wxWl2YI5KjNdOZ+d065RN3AIsL3LZTRTROE3bf9HI NdaK4Bw3qOZIXc6BL7bNFkIox2Bi3w9Xa7JneczCF1+SROBO2/7fXan5pNBpuTdBb8UKr8 kL34kNSe+G5nIc+cDWG6aZ4cpTq1c6EaB5I8h0r9T43sgp4wRbQMjSFi75UDTG5VtSQm/x IqqJaxNWqcNFE+SAC7MVdJzQS/An0zAaSUfwrmI+FZe2anKXwrmdnmZdV5lKQA== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=dkim; d=freebsd.org; t=1653536268; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=jZtuLbdzCZKxCqJ0UoetaBDOsoJvD0vDJMxcphRcDx0PGzJD1nwkEpqKO06RH1ayFjcI+u nAohkwlUGwCCO3cqngLo9UUk0vOFX6+UeryRYAtBtBhlnEx8eCdwZoZFGK/E3dUJkyV8fD sWaZ3MK+/YcVUWHZYqg84CrJQKLDKaC2BgnzSb+OWvxxaOv4bM1D7aN0pN+xliH/ZNZULl MUAMVQ8IAy7+YyGGO+m1mOiqD/HpkcpILwCz5EVGperV8h/B2U2Y9vc/xXp9YzSdiYlT4I NHAKlU+NXxIM/oJUZDGlY5yNKTM9BqXyDJqPl0mpFaGK1xXbMClTI/2RXRT2Tg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx1.freebsd.org; none X-ThisMailContainsUnwantedMimeParts: N Hi Adam, Sorry for the late reply to your original reply. Many good replies from Rick cc'd (Hi Rick :-) 1 item pops out to me below. ----- Adam Stylinski's Original Message ----- > > What is your server system? Make/model/ram/etc. > Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2603 v4 @ 1.70GHz (6 cores, a little starved > on the clock but the load at least is basically zero during this test) > 128GB of memory > > > top -aH > During the copy load (for brevity, only did the real top contenders for CPU here): > last pid: 15560; load averages: 0.25, 0.39, 0.27 up 4+15:48:54 09:17:38 > 98 threads: 2 running, 96 sleeping > CPU: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 19.1% system, 5.6% interrupt, 75.3% idle > Mem: 12M Active, 4405M Inact, 8284K Laundry, 115G Wired, 1148M Buf, 4819M Free > ARC: 98G Total, 80G MFU, 15G MRU, 772K Anon, 1235M Header, 1042M Other > 91G Compressed, 189G Uncompressed, 2.09:1 Ratio > Swap: 5120M Total, 5120M Free > > PID USERNAME PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE C TIME WCPU COMMAND > 3830 root 20 0 12M 2700K rpcsvc 2 1:16 53.26% nfsd: server (nfsd){nfsd: service} > 3830 root 20 0 12M 2700K CPU5 5 5:42 52.96% nfsd: server (nfsd){nfsd: master} > 15560 adam 20 0 17M 5176K CPU2 2 0:00 0.12% top -aH > 1493 root 20 0 13M 2260K select 3 0:36 0.01% /usr/sbin/powerd > 1444 root 20 0 75M 2964K select 5 0:19 0.01% /usr/sbin/mountd -r /etc/exports /etc/zfs/exports > 1215 uucp 20 0 13M 2820K select 5 0:27 0.01% /usr/local/libexec/nut/usbhid-ups -a cyberpower > 93424 adam 20 0 21M 9900K select 0 0:00 0.01% sshd: adam@pts/0 (sshd) > > > ifconfig -vm > mlxen0: flags=8843 metric 0 mtu 9000 > options=ed07bb > capabilities=ed07bb > ether 00:02:c9:35:df:20 > inet 10.5.5.1 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 10.5.5.255 > media: Ethernet autoselect (40Gbase-CR4 ) Something worth checking: The media line indicates that rxpause/txpause are active for this interface. I don't have a mlx based Linux system handy so the following is from memory. On the Linux side, please try: ethtool -S $interface | grep pause The output should include the number of times a pause frame was transmitted (Linux system NIC receive queue (almost) full) or a pause frame was received (meaning the FreeBSD system NIC receive queue (almost) full). If the values are 0 this is not an issue. If rx/tx pause frames are being sent/received this will slow down the link (rather dramatically sometimes). With only rx/tx pause (vs dcbx) a system spewing pause frames can bring a set of connected systems to a slow crawl. -John > status: active > supported media: > media autoselect > media 40Gbase-CR4 mediaopt full-duplex > media 10Gbase-CX4 mediaopt full-duplex > media 10Gbase-SR mediaopt full-duplex > media 1000baseT mediaopt full-duplex > nd6 options=29 > plugged: QSFP+ 40GBASE-CR4 (No separable connector) > vendor: Mellanox PN: MC2207130-002 SN: MT1419VS07971 DATE: 2014-06-06 > module temperature: 0.00 C voltage: 0.00 Volts > lane 1: RX power: 0.00 mW (-inf dBm) TX bias: 0.00 mA > lane 2: RX power: 0.00 mW (-inf dBm) TX bias: 0.00 mA > lane 3: RX power: 0.00 mW (-inf dBm) TX bias: 0.00 mA > lane 4: RX power: 0.00 mW (-inf dBm) TX bias: 0.00 mA > > > - What are your values for: > > > > -- kern.ipc.maxsockbuf > > -- net.inet.tcp.sendbuf_max > > -- net.inet.tcp.recvbuf_max > > > > -- net.inet.tcp.sendspace > > -- net.inet.tcp.recvspace > > > > -- net.inet.tcp.delayed_ack > kern.ipc.maxsockbuf: 16777216 > net.inet.tcp.sendbuf_max: 16777216 > net.inet.tcp.recvbuf_max: 16777216 > net.inet.tcp.sendspace: 32768 # This is interesting? I'm not sure why > the discrepancy here > net.inet.tcp.recvspace: 4194304 > net.inet.tcp.delayed_ack: 0 > > > netstat -i > Name Mtu Network Address Ipkts Ierrs Idrop > Opkts Oerrs Coll > igb0 9000 ac:1f:6b:b0:60:bc 18230625 0 0 > 24178283 0 0 > igb1 9000 ac:1f:6b:b0:60:bc 14341213 0 0 > 8447249 0 0 > lo0 16384 lo0 367691 0 0 > 367691 0 0 > lo0 - localhost localhost 68 - - > 68 - - > lo0 - fe80::%lo0/64 fe80::1%lo0 0 - - > 0 - - > lo0 - your-net localhost 348944 - - > 348944 - - > mlxen 9000 00:02:c9:35:df:20 13138046 0 12 > 26308206 0 0 > mlxen - 10.5.5.0/24 10.5.5.1 11592389 - - > 24345184 - - > vm-pu 9000 56:3e:55:8a:2a:f8 7270 0 0 > 962249 102 0 > lagg0 9000 ac:1f:6b:b0:60:bc 31543941 0 0 > 31623674 0 0 > lagg0 - 192.168.0.0/2 nasbox 27967582 - - > 41779731 - - > > > What threads/irq are allocated to your NIC? 'vmstat -i' > > Doesn't seem perfectly balanced but not terribly imbalanced, either: > > interrupt total rate > irq9: acpi0 3 0 > irq18: ehci0 ehci1+ 803162 2 > cpu0:timer 67465114 167 > cpu1:timer 65068819 161 > cpu2:timer 65535300 163 > cpu3:timer 63408731 157 > cpu4:timer 63026304 156 > cpu5:timer 63431412 157 > irq56: nvme0:admin 18 0 > irq57: nvme0:io0 544999 1 > irq58: nvme0:io1 465816 1 > irq59: nvme0:io2 487486 1 > irq60: nvme0:io3 474616 1 > irq61: nvme0:io4 452527 1 > irq62: nvme0:io5 467807 1 > irq63: mps0 36110415 90 > irq64: mps1 112328723 279 > irq65: mps2 54845974 136 > irq66: mps3 50770215 126 > irq68: xhci0 3122136 8 > irq70: igb0:rxq0 1974562 5 > irq71: igb0:rxq1 3034190 8 > irq72: igb0:rxq2 28703842 71 > irq73: igb0:rxq3 1126533 3 > irq74: igb0:aq 7 0 > irq75: igb1:rxq0 1852321 5 > irq76: igb1:rxq1 2946722 7 > irq77: igb1:rxq2 9602613 24 > irq78: igb1:rxq3 4101258 10 > irq79: igb1:aq 8 0 > irq80: ahci1 37386191 93 > irq81: mlx4_core0 4748775 12 > irq82: mlx4_core0 13754442 34 > irq83: mlx4_core0 3551629 9 > irq84: mlx4_core0 2595850 6 > irq85: mlx4_core0 4947424 12 > Total 769135944 1908 > > > Are the above threads floating or mapped? 'cpuset -g ...' > > I suspect I was supposed to run this against the argument of a pid, > maybe nfsd? Here's the output without an argument > > pid -1 mask: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 > pid -1 domain policy: first-touch mask: 0 > > > Disable nfs tcp drc > > This is the first I've even seen a duplicate request cache mentioned. > It seems counter-intuitive for why that'd help but maybe I'll try > doing that. What exactly is the benefit? > > > What is your atime setting? > > Disabled at both the file system and the client mounts. > > > You also state you are using a Linux client. Are you using the MLX affinity scripts, buffer sizing suggestions, etc, etc. Have you swapped the Linux system for a fbsd system? > I've not, though I do vaguely recall mellanox supplying some scripts > in their documentation that fixed interrupt handling on specific cores > at one point. Is this what you're referring to? I could give that a > try. I don't at present have any FreeBSD client systems with enough > PCI express bandwidth to swap things out for a Linux vs FreeBSD test. > > > You mention iperf. Please post the options you used when invoking iperf and it's output. > > Setting up the NFS client as a "server", since it seems that the > terminology is a little bit flipped with iperf, here's the output: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > Server listening on 5201 (test #1) > ----------------------------------------------------------- > Accepted connection from 10.5.5.1, port 11534 > [ 5] local 10.5.5.4 port 5201 connected to 10.5.5.1 port 43931 > [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate > [ 5] 0.00-1.00 sec 3.81 GBytes 32.7 Gbits/sec > [ 5] 1.00-2.00 sec 4.20 GBytes 36.1 Gbits/sec > [ 5] 2.00-3.00 sec 4.18 GBytes 35.9 Gbits/sec > [ 5] 3.00-4.00 sec 4.21 GBytes 36.1 Gbits/sec > [ 5] 4.00-5.00 sec 4.20 GBytes 36.1 Gbits/sec > [ 5] 5.00-6.00 sec 4.21 GBytes 36.2 Gbits/sec > [ 5] 6.00-7.00 sec 4.10 GBytes 35.2 Gbits/sec > [ 5] 7.00-8.00 sec 4.20 GBytes 36.1 Gbits/sec > [ 5] 8.00-9.00 sec 4.21 GBytes 36.1 Gbits/sec > [ 5] 9.00-10.00 sec 4.20 GBytes 36.1 Gbits/sec > [ 5] 10.00-10.00 sec 7.76 MBytes 35.3 Gbits/sec > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate > [ 5] 0.00-10.00 sec 41.5 GBytes 35.7 Gbits/sec receiver > ----------------------------------------------------------- > Server listening on 5201 (test #2) > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > On Sun, May 22, 2022 at 3:45 AM John wrote: > > > > ----- Adam Stylinski's Original Message ----- > > > Hello, > > > > > > I have two systems connected via ConnectX-3 mellanox cards in ethernet > > > mode. They have their MTU's maxed at 9000, their ring buffers maxed > > > at 8192, and I can hit around 36 gbps with iperf. > > > > > > When using an NFS client (client = linux, server = freebsd), I see a > > > maximum rate of around 20gbps. The test file is fully in ARC. The > > > test is performed with an NFS mount nconnect=4 and an rsize/wsize of > > > 1MB. > > > > > > Here's the flame graph of the kernel of the system in question, with > > > idle stacks removed: > > > > > > https://gist.github.com/KungFuJesus/918c6dcf40ae07767d5382deafab3a52#file-nfs_fg-svg > > > > > > The longest functions seems like maybe it's the ERMS aware memcpy > > > happening from the ARC? Is there maybe a missing fast path that could > > > take fewer copies into the socket buffer? > > > > Hi Adam - > > > > Some items to look at and possibly include for more responses.... > > > > - What is your server system? Make/model/ram/etc. What is your > > overall 'top' cpu utilization 'top -aH' ... > > > > - It looks like you're using a 40gb/s card. Posting the output of > > 'ifconfig -vm' would provide additional information. > > > > - Are the interfaces running cleanly? 'netstat -i' is helpful. > > > > - Inspect 'netstat -s'. Duplicate pkts? Resends? Out-of-order? > > > > - Inspect 'netstat -m'. Denied? Delayed? > > > > > > - You mention iperf. Please post the options you used when > > invoking iperf and it's output. > > > > - You appear to be looking for through-put vs low-latency. Have > > you looked at window-size vs the amount of memory allocated to the > > streams. These values vary based on the bit-rate of the connection. > > Tcp connections require outstanding un-ack'd data to be held. > > Effects values below. > > > > > > - What are your values for: > > > > -- kern.ipc.maxsockbuf > > -- net.inet.tcp.sendbuf_max > > -- net.inet.tcp.recvbuf_max > > > > -- net.inet.tcp.sendspace > > -- net.inet.tcp.recvspace > > > > -- net.inet.tcp.delayed_ack > > > > - What threads/irq are allocated to your NIC? 'vmstat -i' > > > > - Are the above threads floating or mapped? 'cpuset -g ...' > > > > - Determine best settings for LRO/TSO for your card. > > > > - Disable nfs tcp drc > > > > - What is your atime setting? > > > > > > If you really think you have a ZFS/Kernel issue, and you're > > data fits in cache, dump ZFS, create a memory backed file system > > and repeat your tests. This will purge a large portion of your > > graph. LRO/TSO changes may do so also. > > > > You also state you are using a Linux client. Are you using > > the MLX affinity scripts, buffer sizing suggestions, etc, etc. > > Have you swapped the Linux system for a fbsd system? > > > > And as a final note, I regularly use Chelsio T62100 cards > > in dual home and/or LACP environments in Supermicro boxes with 100's > > of nfs boot (Bhyve, QEMU, and physical system) clients per server > > with no network starvation or cpu bottlenecks. Clients boot, perform > > their work, and then remotely request image rollback. > > > > > > Hopefully the above will help and provide pointers. > > > > Cheers > >