None

Content analysis details: (-1.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 SHORTCIRCUIT Not all rules were run, due to a shortcircuited rule -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP Subject: [ovirt-users] xfs fragmentation problem caused data domain to hang X-BeenThere: users(a)ovirt.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Main users mailing list for oVirt <users.ovirt.org> List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/options/users>;, <mailto:users-request@ovirt.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.ovirt.org/pipermail/users/> List-Post: <mailto:users@ovirt.org> List-Help: <mailto:users-request@ovirt.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users>;, <mailto:users-request@ovirt.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2017 02:42:38 -0000 Hi. For my data domain, I have one NFS server with a large RAID filesystem (9 TB). I'm only using 2 TB of that at the moment. Today, my NFS server  hung with the following error: All 4 virtualization hosts of course had problems since there was no longer any storage. In the end, it seems like the problem is related to XFS fragmentation... I read this great blog here: https://blog.codecentric.de/en/2017/04/xfs-possible-memory-allocation-dea... In short, I tried this: # xfs_db -r -c "frag -f" /dev/sdb1 actual 4314253, ideal 43107, fragmentation factor 99.00% Apparently the fragmentation factor doesn't mean much, but the fact that "actual" number of extents is considerably higher than "ideal" extents seems that it may be the problem. I saw that many of my virtual disks that are written to a lot have, of course, a lot of extents... For example, on our main web server disk image, there were 247,597 extents alone!  I took the web server down, and ran the XFS defrag command on the disk... # xfs_fsr -v 9a634692-1302-471f-a92e-c978b2b67fd0 9a634692-1302-471f-a92e-c978b2b67fd0 extents before:247597 after:429 DONE 9a634692-1302-471f-a92e-c978b2b67fd0 247,597 before and 429 after!  WOW! Are virtual disks a problem with XFS?  Why isn't this memory allocation deadlock issue more prevalent.  I do see this article mentioned on many web posts. I don't specifically see any recommendation to *not* use XFS for the data domain though. I was running CentOS 7.3 on the file server, but before rebooting the server, I upgraded to the latest kernel and CentOS 7.4 in the hopes that if there was a kernel issue, that this would solve it. I took a few virtual systems down, and ran the defrag on the disks.  However, with over 30 virtual systems, I don't really want to do this individually. I was wondering if I could run xfs_fsr on all the disks LIVE? It says in the manual that you can run it live, but I can't see how this would be good when a system is using that disk, and I don't want to deal with major corruption across the board. Any thoughts? Thanks, Jason.