[ovirt-users] 3.4: VDSM Memory consumption
Daniel Helgenberger
daniel.helgenberger at m-box.de
Mon Sep 29 10:25:22 UTC 2014
Dan,
I just reply to the list since I do not want to clutter BZ:
While migrating VMs is easy (and the sampling is already running), can
someone tell me the correct polling port to block with iptables?
Thanks,
On 27.09.2014 13:18, Daniel Helgenberger wrote:
> Hallo Dan,
>
> I just opened a BZ aginst this [1]. Please let me know if I can be of
> further assistance. I stopped the cron script for now, so vdsm can 'grow
> nicely' (about 91.5 MB per 6hrs)
>
> Cheers,
> [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1147148
>
> On 24.09.2014 19:20, Dan Kenigsberg wrote:
>>> On 01.09.2014 18:08, Dan Kenigsberg wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Sep 01, 2014 at 03:30:53PM +0000, Daniel Helgenberger wrote:
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> in my LAB cluster I run into OOM conditions frequently because of a huge
>>>>> VDSM process. The memory stats from my nodes right now:
>>>>>
>>>>> Node A; running one VM:
>>>>> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
>>>>> 3465 vdsm 0 -20 18.6g 9.8g 8244 S 32.1 50.3 27265:21 vdsm
>>>>> 7439 qemu 20 0 5641m 4.1g 4280 S 22.9 20.9 12737:08 qemu-kvm
>>>>> 2912 root 15 -5 2710m 35m 5968 S 0.0 0.2 0:04.76 supervdsmServer
>>>>>
>>>>> Node B, running 3 VMs including HosedEngine:
>>>>> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
>>>>> 9079 vdsm 0 -20 9.9g 5.0g 7496 S 49.7 43.0 11858:06 vdsm
>>>>> 3347 qemu 20 0 7749m 1.8g 5264 S 4.3 15.8 3:25.71 qemu-kvm
>>>>> 18463 qemu 20 0 3865m 415m 5516 R 1.6 3.5 359:15.24 qemu-kvm
>>>>> 11755 qemu 20 0 3873m 276m 5336 S 80.5 2.3 21639:39 qemu-kvm
>>>>>
>>>>> Basically VDSM consumes more then all my VMs.
>>>>>
>>>>> I thought of VDSM as a 'supervisor' process for qemu-kvm?
>>>>>
>>>>> I attached recend vdsm logs as well as a screen shot.
>>>> Thanks for your report. It sounds like
>>>>
>>>> Bug 1130045 - Very high memory consumption
>>>>
>>>> which we believe is due to python-ioprocess.
>> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 03:39:25PM +0000, Daniel Helgenberger wrote:
>>> Hi Dan,
>>>
>>> just to get this right, you yourself pointed me to the BZ. I was looking
>>> at the duplicate, since the metadata tags 3.4. Sorry my lack of
>>> knowlage, I really have no idea whatever there is an ioprocess python
>>> binding in 3.4 or not - I just see vdsmd resident size growing in 3.4.
>>> The top output below was from 3.4.3; I just upgraded to 3.4.4. But
>>> clearly vdsmd should not use 10GB RAM?
>> I'm sorry to have mislead you. The bug I refered to was indeed due to
>> ioprocess, and caused a very dramatic memory leak in 3.5. We have yet
>> another memory leak in 3.5.0, when managing gluster blocks
>> Bug 1142647 - supervdsm leaks memory when using glusterfs
>>
>> 3.4.z does not use ioprocess, and do not have that gluster bug, so you
>> are seeing completely different and much older.
>>
>> These leaks are not so easy to debug - but they are important. I'd love
>> if you open a BZ about it. Please specify the rate of the leak, when
>> does it happen (when a host has VMs? when a host is polled by Engine? On
>> nfs? iscsi?
>>
>> What's `lsof -p pid-of-fat-vdsm`?
>>
>> I think that Francesco has some debug patches to help nail it down - he
>> can provide smarter questions.
>>
>> Dan.
>>
>>
--
Daniel Helgenberger
m box bewegtbild GmbH
P: +49/30/2408781-22
F: +49/30/2408781-10
ACKERSTR. 19
D-10115 BERLIN
www.m-box.de www.monkeymen.tv
Geschäftsführer: Martin Retschitzegger / Michaela Göllner
Handeslregister: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg / HRB 112767
More information about the Users
mailing list