[ovirt-users] VDSM memory consumption

[Dan Kenigsberg]

On Mon, Mar 09, 2015 at 10:40:51AM -0500, Darrell Budic wrote:
> > On Mar 9, 2015, at 4:51 AM, Dan Kenigsberg <danken at redhat.com> wrote:
> > 
> > On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 10:58:53AM -0600, Darrell Budic wrote:
> >> I believe the supervdsm leak was fixed, but 3.5.1 versions of vdsmd still leaks slowly, ~300k/hr, yes.
> >> 
> >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1158108
> >> 
> >> 
> >>> On Mar 6, 2015, at 10:23 AM, Chris Adams <cma at cmadams.net> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> Once upon a time, Federico Alberto Sayd <fsayd at uncu.edu.ar> said:
> >>>> I am experiencing troubles with VDSM memory consuption.
> >>>> 
> >>>> I am running
> >>>> 
> >>>> Engine: ovirt 3.5.1
> >>>> 
> >>>> Nodes:
> >>>> 
> >>>> Centos 6.6
> >>>> VDSM 4.16.10-8
> >>>> Libvirt: libvirt-0.10.2-46
> >>>> Kernel: 2.6.32
> >>>> 
> >>>> When the host boots, memory consuption is normal, but after 2 or 3
> >>>> days running, VDSM memory consuption grows and it consumes more
> >>>> memory that all vm's running in the host. If I restart the vdsm
> >>>> service, memory consuption normalizes, but then it start growing
> >>>> again.
> >>>> 
> >>>> I have seen some BZ about vdsm and supervdsm about memory leaks, but
> >>>> I don't know if VDSM 4.6.10.8 is still affected by a related bug.
> >>> 
> >>> Can't help, but I see the same thing with CentOS 7 nodes and the same
> >>> version of vdsm.
> >>> -- 
> >>> Chris Adams <cma at cmadams.net>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Users mailing list
> >>> Users at ovirt.org
> >>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> > 
> > I'm afraid that we are yet to find a solution for this issue, which is
> > completly different from the horrible leak of supervdsm < 4.16.7.
> > 
> > Could you corroborate the claim of
> >    Bug 1147148 - M2Crypto usage in vdsm leaks memory
> > ? Does the leak disappear once you start using plaintext transport?
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Dan.
> 
> I don’t think this is crypto related, but I could try that if you still need some confirmation (and point me at a quick doc on switching to plaintext?).
> 
> This is from #ovirt around November 18th I think, Saggi thought he’d found something related:
> 
> 9:58:43 AM saggi: YamakasY: Found the leak
> 9:58:48 AM saggi: YamakasY: Or at least the flow
> 9:58:57 AM saggi: YamakasY: The good news is that I can reproduce
> 9:59:20 AM YamakasY: saggi: that's kewl!
> 9:59:25 AM YamakasY: saggi: what happens ?
> 9:59:41 AM YamakasY: I know from Telsin (ping ping!) that he sees it going faster on gluster usage
> tdosek left the room (quit: Ping timeout: 480 seconds). (10:00:02 AM)
> djasa left the room (quit: Quit: Leaving). (10:00:24 AM)
> mlipchuk left the room (quit: Quit: Leaving.). (10:00:29 AM)
> laravot left the room (quit: Quit: Leaving.). (10:01:19 AM)
> 10:01:54 AM saggi: YamakasY: it's in getCapabilities(). Here is the RSS graph. The flatlines are when I stopped calling it and called other verbs. http://i.imgur.com/CLm0Q75.png

I do recall what is the issue Saggi and YamakasY were dicussing (CCing
the pair), or if it reached fruition as a patch. It is certainly
something other than Bug 1158108, as the latter speak about a leak in a
normal working state, with no getCapabilities calls.