Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 24 Jul 2014 20:14:02 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca>
To:        Harald Schmalzbauer <h.schmalzbauer@omnilan.de>
Cc:        freebsd-stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: nfsd server cache flooded, try to increase nfsrc_floodlevel
Message-ID:  <1327388853.3033655.1406247242764.JavaMail.root@uoguelph.ca>
In-Reply-To: <53D0CBD6.1020708@omnilan.de>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Harald Schmalzbauer wrote:
> Bez=C3=BCglich Rick Macklem's Nachricht vom 08.08.2013 14:20 (localtime):
> > Lars Eggert wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> every few days or so, my -STABLE NFS server (v3 and v4) gets
> >> wedged
> >> with a ton of messages about "nfsd server cache flooded, try to
> >> increase nfsrc_floodlevel" in the log, and nfsstat shows TCPPeak
> >> at
> >> 16385. It requires a reboot to unwedge, restarting the server does
> >> not help.
> >>
> >> The clients are (mostly) six -CURRENT nfsv4 boxes that netboot
> >> from
> >> the server and mount all drives from there.
> >>
Have you tried increasing vfs.nfsd.tcphighwater?
This needs to be increased to increase the flood level above 16384.

Garrett Wollman sets:
vfs.nfsd.tcphighwater=3D100000
vfs.nfsd.tcpcachetimeo=3D300

or something like that, if I recall correctly.

rick


> >> I googled around and saw that others have hit this issue, but I
> >> haven't seen any resolution posted. I guess I can increase
> >> NFSRVCACHE_FLOODLEVEL in the source, but I wonder if I wouldn't
> >> simply hit the increase value after a little while longer...
> >>
> >> Lars
> >>
> > You can either try this patch (which dynamically adjusts
> > nfsrc_floodlevel
> > along with handling a variety of overhead issues for the DRC under
> > heavy load):
> >    http://people.freebsd.org/~rmacklem/drc4.patch
> >
> > or just bump it up a bunch. The default value was safe for a server
> > with 256Mbytes
> > of ram and a default mbuf cluster limit. The only thing you might
> > have to do
> > along with bumping NFSRC_FLOODLEVEL up is increasing
> > kern.ipc.mbclusters.
> >
> > The variant of the above patch will make it into head someday, once
> > I merge
> > in changes from ivoras@'s similar patch and confer with him about
> > it.
>=20
> Dear all,
>=20
> regarding the conversation from last year - quoted above,
> I think I found the mentioned patch (it's variants) MFCd in r255532
> (from
> http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=3Drevision&amp;revision=3D254337),
> so it's included in 9.3-RELEASE.
>=20
> Unfortunately I'm still having the nfsrc_floodlevel problem with
> OpenOwner=3D16385, CacheSize=3D16385 (in nfsstat -e -s) in my production
> environment under 9.3-RELEASE-amd64.
> Extremely light load on the server (2 (FreeBSD8/9) clients), but the
> building client (nfsv4) locks up frequently. It mounts 'home' and
> 'ports/ports' via NFSv4 (this time, 'make index' in nfs-mounted
> /usr/ports killed the nfsv4server).
>=20
>=20
>     I found another interesting 3 years old patch/thread, which seems
> never beeing comitted:
> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-fs/2011-July/012016.html
>=20
> I don't really understand all these details of nfs(v4), but I observe
> problems with regular usage, so I wanted to ask if there are new
> findings regarding the "nfsd server cache flooded, try to increase
> nfsrc_floodlevel" messages (while 'nfsrc_floodlevel' doesn't seem to
> be
> tunable in 9.3).
> To my understanding, it's a problem on the server side, right?
>=20
> Is the fix from 3 years back still adequate (does apply with view
> offsets only to 9.3)?
>=20
> I'm currently testing 9.3-RELEASE+noopen.patch, but it usually took
> two
> or three days until the client locked up (hadn't looked for the
> reason
> before the last issue, nfs(v4) was brand new reintroduced here)
>=20
> Thanks,
>=20
> -Harry
>=20
>=20



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1327388853.3033655.1406247242764.JavaMail.root>