From: James Vanns <james.vanns@framestore.com>
To: Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@intel.com>
Cc: lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Lustre-devel] Export over NFS sets rsize to 1MB?
Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 10:23:17 +0100 (BST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2121037782.19846759.1368609797839.JavaMail.root@framestore.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CDB80F65.32491%andreas.dilger@intel.com>
Thanks for the help Andreas - I too asked the NFS developers (on the list)
and they came back with /proc/fs/nfsd/max_block_size and nfsd_get_default_max_blksize()
in fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c.
For what it's worth, this is kernel 2.6.32 and Lustre 1.8.8.
Reckon I've got what I asked for now ;)
Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andreas Dilger" <andreas.dilger@intel.com>
To: "james vanns" <james.vanns@framestore.com>
Cc: lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Sent: Tuesday, 14 May, 2013 11:06:08 PM
Subject: Re: [Lustre-devel] Export over NFS sets rsize to 1MB?
On 2013/14/05 9:07 AM, "James Vanns" <james.vanns@framestore.com> wrote:
>> On 2013/13/05 7:19 AM, "James Vanns" <james.vanns@framestore.com>
>> wrote:
>> >Hello dev list. Apologies for a post to perhaps the wrong group but
>> >I'm having a bit of difficulty locating any document or wiki describing
>> >how and/or where the preferred read and write block size for NFS
>> >exports of a Lustre filesystem are set to 1MB?
>>
>> 1MB is the RPC size and "optimal IO size" for Lustre. This would
>> normally be exported to applications via the stat(2) "st_blksize" field,
>> though it is typically 2MB (2x the RPC size in order to allow some
>>pipelining). I suspect this is where NFS is getting the value, since
>>it is not passed up via the statfs(2) call.
>
>Hmm. OK. I've confirmed it isn't from any struct stat{} attribute
>(st_blksize
>is still just 4k) but yes, our RPC size is 1MB. It isn't coming from
>statfs()
>or statvfs() either.
I've CC'd the Linux NFS mailing list, since I don't know enough about the
NFS client/server code to decide where this is coming from either.
James, what kernel version do you have on the Lustre clients (NFS servers)
and on the NFS clients?
>> >Basically we have two Lustre filesystems exported over NFSv3. Our
>> >lustre block size is 4k and the max r/w size is 1MB. Without any
>> >special rsize/wsize options set for the export the default one
>> >suggested to clients (MOUNT->FSINFO RPC) as the preferred
>> >size is set to 1MB. How does Lustre figure this out? Other
>> >non-Lustre exports are generally much less; 4, 8, 16 or 32 kilobytes.
>>
>> Taking a quick look at the code, it looks like NFS TCP connections
>> all have a maximum max_payload of 1MB, but this is limited in a number
>>of places in the code by the actual read size, and other maxima (for
>> which I can't easily find the source value).
>
>Yes it seems that 1MB is the maximum but also the optimal or preferred.
>
>> >Any hints would be appreciated. Documentation or code paths welcome
>> >as are annotated /proc locations.
>>
>> To clarify from your question - is this large blocksize causing a
>> performance problem? I recall some applications having problems with
>> stdio "fread()" and friends reading too much data into their buffers
>> if they are doing random IO. Ideally stdio shouldn't be reading more
>> than it needs when doing random IO.
>
>We're experiencing what appears to be (as of yet I have no hard evidence)
>contention due to connection 'hogging' for these large reads. We have a
>set
>of 4 NFS servers in a DNS round-robin all configured to serve up our
>Lustre
>filesystem across 64 knfsds (per host). It's possible that we simply don't
>have enough hosts (or knfsds) for the #clients because many of the clients
>will be reading large amounts of data (1MB at a time) and therefore
>preventing
>other queued clients from getting a look-in. Of course this appears to
>the user
>as just a very slow experience.
>
>At the moment, I'm just trying to understand where this 1MB is coming
>from!
>The RPC transport size (I forgot to confirm - yes, we're serving NFS over
>TCP) is 1MB for all other 'regular' NFS servers yet their r/wsize are
>quite different.
>
>Thanks for the feedback and sorry I can't be more accurate at the moment
>:\
It should also be possible to explicitly mount the clients with rsize=65536
and wsize=65536, but it would be better to understand the cause of this.
>> At one time in the past, we derived the st_blksize from the file
>> stripe_size, but this caused problems with the NFS "Connectathon" or
>> similar because the block size would change from when the file was
>>first opened. It is currently limited by LL_MAX_BLKSIZE_BITS for all
>> files, but I wouldn't recommend reducing this directly, since it would
>> also affect "cp" and others that also depend on st_blksize for the
>> "optimal IO size". It would be possible to reintroduce the per-file
>> tunable in ll_update_inode() I think.
Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Lustre Software Architect
Intel High Performance Data Division
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
Jim Vanns
Senior Software Developer
Framestore
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: James Vanns <james.vanns@framestore.com>
To: lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org
Subject: [Lustre-devel] Export over NFS sets rsize to 1MB?
Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 10:23:17 +0100 (BST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2121037782.19846759.1368609797839.JavaMail.root@framestore.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CDB80F65.32491%andreas.dilger@intel.com>
Thanks for the help Andreas - I too asked the NFS developers (on the list)
and they came back with /proc/fs/nfsd/max_block_size and nfsd_get_default_max_blksize()
in fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c.
For what it's worth, this is kernel 2.6.32 and Lustre 1.8.8.
Reckon I've got what I asked for now ;)
Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andreas Dilger" <andreas.dilger@intel.com>
To: "james vanns" <james.vanns@framestore.com>
Cc: lustre-devel at lists.lustre.org, linux-nfs at vger.kernel.org
Sent: Tuesday, 14 May, 2013 11:06:08 PM
Subject: Re: [Lustre-devel] Export over NFS sets rsize to 1MB?
On 2013/14/05 9:07 AM, "James Vanns" <james.vanns@framestore.com> wrote:
>> On 2013/13/05 7:19 AM, "James Vanns" <james.vanns@framestore.com>
>> wrote:
>> >Hello dev list. Apologies for a post to perhaps the wrong group but
>> >I'm having a bit of difficulty locating any document or wiki describing
>> >how and/or where the preferred read and write block size for NFS
>> >exports of a Lustre filesystem are set to 1MB?
>>
>> 1MB is the RPC size and "optimal IO size" for Lustre. This would
>> normally be exported to applications via the stat(2) "st_blksize" field,
>> though it is typically 2MB (2x the RPC size in order to allow some
>>pipelining). I suspect this is where NFS is getting the value, since
>>it is not passed up via the statfs(2) call.
>
>Hmm. OK. I've confirmed it isn't from any struct stat{} attribute
>(st_blksize
>is still just 4k) but yes, our RPC size is 1MB. It isn't coming from
>statfs()
>or statvfs() either.
I've CC'd the Linux NFS mailing list, since I don't know enough about the
NFS client/server code to decide where this is coming from either.
James, what kernel version do you have on the Lustre clients (NFS servers)
and on the NFS clients?
>> >Basically we have two Lustre filesystems exported over NFSv3. Our
>> >lustre block size is 4k and the max r/w size is 1MB. Without any
>> >special rsize/wsize options set for the export the default one
>> >suggested to clients (MOUNT->FSINFO RPC) as the preferred
>> >size is set to 1MB. How does Lustre figure this out? Other
>> >non-Lustre exports are generally much less; 4, 8, 16 or 32 kilobytes.
>>
>> Taking a quick look at the code, it looks like NFS TCP connections
>> all have a maximum max_payload of 1MB, but this is limited in a number
>>of places in the code by the actual read size, and other maxima (for
>> which I can't easily find the source value).
>
>Yes it seems that 1MB is the maximum but also the optimal or preferred.
>
>> >Any hints would be appreciated. Documentation or code paths welcome
>> >as are annotated /proc locations.
>>
>> To clarify from your question - is this large blocksize causing a
>> performance problem? I recall some applications having problems with
>> stdio "fread()" and friends reading too much data into their buffers
>> if they are doing random IO. Ideally stdio shouldn't be reading more
>> than it needs when doing random IO.
>
>We're experiencing what appears to be (as of yet I have no hard evidence)
>contention due to connection 'hogging' for these large reads. We have a
>set
>of 4 NFS servers in a DNS round-robin all configured to serve up our
>Lustre
>filesystem across 64 knfsds (per host). It's possible that we simply don't
>have enough hosts (or knfsds) for the #clients because many of the clients
>will be reading large amounts of data (1MB at a time) and therefore
>preventing
>other queued clients from getting a look-in. Of course this appears to
>the user
>as just a very slow experience.
>
>At the moment, I'm just trying to understand where this 1MB is coming
>from!
>The RPC transport size (I forgot to confirm - yes, we're serving NFS over
>TCP) is 1MB for all other 'regular' NFS servers yet their r/wsize are
>quite different.
>
>Thanks for the feedback and sorry I can't be more accurate at the moment
>:\
It should also be possible to explicitly mount the clients with rsize=65536
and wsize=65536, but it would be better to understand the cause of this.
>> At one time in the past, we derived the st_blksize from the file
>> stripe_size, but this caused problems with the NFS "Connectathon" or
>> similar because the block size would change from when the file was
>>first opened. It is currently limited by LL_MAX_BLKSIZE_BITS for all
>> files, but I wouldn't recommend reducing this directly, since it would
>> also affect "cp" and others that also depend on st_blksize for the
>> "optimal IO size". It would be possible to reintroduce the per-file
>> tunable in ll_update_inode() I think.
Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Lustre Software Architect
Intel High Performance Data Division
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
Jim Vanns
Senior Software Developer
Framestore
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-15 9:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1212911910.19338063.1368451002112.JavaMail.root@framestore.com>
2013-05-13 13:19 ` [Lustre-devel] Export over NFS sets rsize to 1MB? James Vanns
2013-05-13 21:58 ` Dilger, Andreas
2013-05-14 15:07 ` James Vanns
2013-05-14 22:06 ` Dilger, Andreas
2013-05-14 22:06 ` Dilger, Andreas
2013-05-15 9:23 ` James Vanns [this message]
2013-05-15 9:23 ` James Vanns
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2121037782.19846759.1368609797839.JavaMail.root@framestore.com \
--to=james.vanns@framestore.com \
--cc=andreas.dilger@intel.com \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.