Re: mdadm memory leak?

[David Kowis <dkowis@shlrm.org>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I resent this email with the slabinfo attachment on it, because I didn't think it sent at all. I got a message back telling me that
slabinfo.com is not a valid attachment. Apparently if you do not put an extension on the file, it's .com .
perhaps the slabinfo.txt will have more info  :) if not, well then thanks for the time :)

Neil Brown wrote:
> On Tuesday July 5, dkowis@shlrm.org wrote:
> 
>>Quoting Neil Brown <neilb@cse.unsw.edu.au>:
>>
>>
>>>Hmmm.
>>>There is an md related memory leak in 2.6.12, but I don't think it is
>>>there in 2.6.11.anything.
>>>
>>>If 'ps' doesn't show anything, the next place to look is
>>>/proc/slabinfo (which 'slabtop' might display for you).
>>
>>Slabtop:
>>Active / Total Objects (% used)    : 217562 / 225483 (96.5%)
>>Active / Total Slabs (% used)      : 3972 / 3972 (100.0%)
>>Active / Total Caches (% used)     : 78 / 139 (56.1%)
>>Active / Total Size (% used)       : 14328.78K / 15891.08K (90.2%)
>>Minimum / Average / Maximum Object : 0.01K / 0.07K / 128.00K
>>
>>  OBJS ACTIVE  USE OBJ SIZE  SLABS OBJ/SLAB CACHE SIZE NAME
>>152098 151909  99%    0.02K    673      226      2692K fasync_cache
>>24867  24846  99%    0.05K    307       81      1228K buffer_head
>>12432   8306  66%    0.27K    888       14      3552K radix_tree_node
>>  7308   6876  94%    0.13K    252       29      1008K dentry_cache
>>  6303   5885  93%    0.36K    573       11      2292K reiser_inode_cache
> 
> 
> So you have about 16 megabytes used by the slab cache, none of the big
> users 'md' related. 
> 16M doesn't sound like a big deal, so I suspect this isn't the source
> of the leak. 
>  From a separate Email I see:
> 
>># ipcs -m
> 
> ------ Shared Memory Segments --------
> key        shmid      owner      perms      bytes      nattch     status
> 0x00000000 65536      root      600        33554432   11         dest
> 0x0052e2c1 98305      postgres  600        10330112   11
> 
> that you have 43M is shared-memory, which is more that the slab is
> using but still barely 6% of your total memory.
> 
> 
>>Mem:    773984k total,   765556k used,     8428k free,    65812k buffers
>>Swap:  2755136k total,        0k used,  2755136k free,   526632k cached
> 
> 
> The fact that swap isn't being touched at all suggests that you aren't
> currently running low on memory.
> The fact the free is low doesn't directly indicate a problem.  Linux
> uses free memory to cache files.  It will discard then from the cache
> if it needs more memory.
> The fact that the OOM killer is hiting obviously is a problem.  Maybe
> you need to report this on linux-kernel was an OOM problem.
> 
> NeilBrown
> 
> 
> 
> !DSPAM:42caff8778281883178545!
> 

- --
David Kowis

ISO Team Lead - www.sourcemage.org
SourceMage GNU/Linux

One login to rule them all, one login to find them. One login to bring them all, and in the web bind them.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)

iD8DBQFCywCotgErhgxHMHsRAggzAJ9/K3WJ1gNrx3aLOdB9JDeDQDtnwACeKZan
qTjRYIgqvOEsvWMSfMD9vIQ=
=a7r7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----