All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alex Zhuravlev <Alex.Zhuravlev@Sun.COM>
To: lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org
Subject: [Lustre-devel] COS performance issues
Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2008 15:48:50 +0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <48EC9E22.2090403@sun.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200810081544.08292.alexander.zarochentsev@sun.com>

try to profile with single CPU? you'll probably get an idea how "per-cpu"
approach can help.

thanks, Alex

Alexander Zarochentsev wrote:
> I have a patch to avoid using of obd_uncommitted_replies_lock 
> in ptlrpc_server_handle_reply but it has minimal effect, 
> ptlrpc_server_handle_reply still the most cpu consuming function
> because of svc->srv_lock contention.
> 
> I think the problem is that COS defers processing of replies to transaction commit time.
> When commit happens, MDS has to process thousands of replies (about 14k replies per
> commit in the test 3.a) in short period of time. I guess the mdt service threads 
> all woken up and spin trying to get the service svr_lock. Processing of new requests may
> also suffer of this.
> 
> I ran the tests with with CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK_SLEEP debugging compiled into a kernel, it found no
> sleep under spinlock bugs.
> 
> Further optimization may include 
> 1. per-reply spin locks.
> 2. per-cpu structures and threads to process reply queues.
> 
> Any comments?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> PS. the test results are much better when MDS server is sata20 machine with 4 cores
> (the MDS from Washie1 has 2 cores), COS=0 and COS=1 have only %3 difference:
> 
> COS=1
> Rate: 3101.77 creates/sec (total: 2 threads 930530 creates 300 secs)
> Rate: 3096.94 creates/sec (total: 2 threads 929083 creates 300 secs)
> 
> COS=0
> Rate: 3184.01 creates/sec (total: 2 threads 958388 creates 301 secs)
> Rate: 3152.89 creates/sec (total: 2 threads 945868 creates 300 secs)
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2008-10-08 11:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-10-08 11:44 [Lustre-devel] COS performance issues Alexander Zarochentsev
2008-10-08 11:48 ` Alex Zhuravlev [this message]
2008-10-12 18:41   ` Alexander Zarochentsev
2008-10-12 19:12     ` Alex Zhuravlev
2008-10-13 14:36       ` Alexander Zarochentsev
2008-10-13 15:04         ` Alex Zhuravlev
2008-10-17  8:07           ` Alexander Zarochentsev
2008-10-17 20:55             ` Robert Read
2008-10-18 10:34               ` Alexander Zarochentsev
2008-10-11 16:00 ` Andreas Dilger
2008-10-11 20:18   ` Eric Barton
2008-10-12 15:51   ` Alexander Zarochentsev
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-10-08  6:40 Alexander Zarochentsev

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=48EC9E22.2090403@sun.com \
    --to=alex.zhuravlev@sun.com \
    --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.