Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 3 Jun 2020 17:33:37 -0400
From:      Allan Jude <allanjude@freebsd.org>
To:        Gordon Bergling <gbergling@googlemail.com>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Constant load of 1 on a recent 12-STABLE
Message-ID:  <8b1498ea-e343-506e-79c7-c25b594808f0@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <20200603202929.GA65032@lion.0xfce3.net>
References:  <20200603101607.GA80381@lion.0xfce3.net> <c18664e8-b4e3-1402-48ed-3a02dc36ce29@freebsd.org> <20200603202929.GA65032@lion.0xfce3.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
--JJy5NuC0GMkBaaeOypx0dOeSnExTkv0aX
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="o0hL8YY1wPr7H8G1B2kjIvX65vRNX7Ins";
 protected-headers="v1"
From: Allan Jude <allanjude@freebsd.org>
To: Gordon Bergling <gbergling@googlemail.com>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <8b1498ea-e343-506e-79c7-c25b594808f0@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: Constant load of 1 on a recent 12-STABLE
References: <20200603101607.GA80381@lion.0xfce3.net>
 <c18664e8-b4e3-1402-48ed-3a02dc36ce29@freebsd.org>
 <20200603202929.GA65032@lion.0xfce3.net>
In-Reply-To: <20200603202929.GA65032@lion.0xfce3.net>

--o0hL8YY1wPr7H8G1B2kjIvX65vRNX7Ins
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 2020-06-03 16:29, Gordon Bergling wrote:
> Hi Allan,
>=20
> On Wed, Jun 03, 2020 at 03:13:47PM -0400, Allan Jude wrote:
>> On 2020-06-03 06:16, Gordon Bergling via freebsd-hackers wrote:
>>> since a while I am seeing a constant load of 1.00 on 12-STABLE,
>>> but all CPUs are shown as 100% idle in top.
>>>
>>> Has anyone an idea what could caused this?
>>>
>>> The load seems to be somewhat real, since the buildtimes on this
>>> machine for -CURRENT increased from about 2 hours to 3 hours.
>>>
>>> This a virtualized system running on Hyper-V, if that matters.
>>>
>>> Any hints are more then appreciated.
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>>
>>> Gordon
>>
>> Try running 'top -SP' and see if that shows a specific CPU being busy,=

>> or a specific process using CPU time
>=20
> Below is the output of 'top -SP'. The only relevant process / thread th=
at is
> relatively constant consumes CPU time seams to be 'zfskern'.
>=20
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------=
------
> last pid: 68549;  load averages:  1.10,  1.19,  1.16 up 0+14:59:45  22:=
17:24
> 67 processes:  2 running, 64 sleeping, 1 waiting
> CPU 0:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idl=
e
> CPU 1:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idl=
e
> CPU 2:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.4% system,  0.0% interrupt, 99.6% idl=
e
> CPU 3:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idl=
e
> Mem: 108M Active, 4160M Inact, 33M Laundry, 3196M Wired, 444M Free
> ARC: 1858M Total, 855M MFU, 138M MRU, 96K Anon, 24M Header, 840M Other
>      461M Compressed, 1039M Uncompressed, 2.25:1 Ratio
> Swap: 2048M Total, 2048M Free
>=20
>   PID USERNAME    THR PRI NICE   SIZE    RES STATE    C   TIME    WCPU =
COMMAND
>    11 root          4 155 ki31     0B    64K RUN      0  47.3H 386.10% =
idle
>     8 root         65  -8    -     0B  1040K t->zth   0 115:39  12.61% =
zfskern
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------=
--------
>=20
> The only key performance indicator that is relatively high IMHO, for a =

> non-busy system, are the context switches, that vmstat has reported.
>=20
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------=
--------
> procs  memory       page                    disks     faults         cp=
u
> r b w  avm   fre   flt  re  pi  po    fr   sr da0 da1   in    sy    cs =
us sy id
> 0 0 0 514G  444M  7877   2   7   0  9595  171   0   0    0  4347 43322 =
17  2 81
> 0 0 0 514G  444M     1   0   0   0     0   44   0   0    0   121 40876 =
 0  0 100
> 0 0 0 514G  444M     0   0   0   0     0   40   0   0    0   133 42520 =
 0  0 100
> 0 0 0 514G  444M     0   0   0   0     0   40   0   0    0   120 43830 =
 0  0 100
> 0 0 0 514G  444M     0   0   0   0     0   40   0   0    0   132 42917 =
 0  0 100
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------=
---------
>=20
> Any other ideas what could generate that load?
>=20
> Best regards,
>=20
> Gordon
>=20

I agree that load average looks out of place here when you look at the %
cpu idle, but I wonder if it is caused by a lot of short lived processes
or threads.

How quickly is the 'last pid' number going up?

You might also look at `zpool iostat 1` or `gstat -p` to see how busy
your disks are

--=20
Allan Jude


--o0hL8YY1wPr7H8G1B2kjIvX65vRNX7Ins--

--JJy5NuC0GMkBaaeOypx0dOeSnExTkv0aX
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32)
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=XPqY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--JJy5NuC0GMkBaaeOypx0dOeSnExTkv0aX--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8b1498ea-e343-506e-79c7-c25b594808f0>