mbuf leakage with nfs/zfs?
Jeremy Chadwick
freebsd at jdc.parodius.com
Sat Feb 27 19:38:23 UTC 2010
On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 08:21:05PM +0100, Gerrit Kühn wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 15:15:52 +0100 Willem Jan Withagen <wjw at digiware.nl>
> wrote about Re: mbuf leakage with nfs/zfs?:
>
> WJW> > 81492/2613/84105 mbufs in use (current/cache/total)
> WJW> > 80467/2235/82702/128000 mbuf clusters in use
> WJW> > (current/cache/total/max) 80458/822 mbuf+clusters out of packet
> WJW> > secondary zone in use (current/cache)
>
> WJW> Over the night I only had rsync and FreeBSD nfs traffic.
> WJW>
> WJW> 45337/2828/48165 mbufs in use (current/cache/total)
> WJW> 44708/1902/46610/262144 mbuf clusters in use (current/cache/total/max)
> WJW> 44040/888 mbuf+clusters out of packet secondary zone in use
> WJW> (current/cache)
>
> After about 24h I now have
>
> 128320/2630/130950 mbufs in use (current/cache/total)
> 127294/1200/128494/512000 mbuf clusters in use (current/cache/total/max)
> 127294/834 mbuf+clusters out of packet secondary zone in use (current/cache)
Follow-up regarding my server statistics shown here:
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2010-February/055458.html
I just pulled the statistics on the same servers for comparison (then
vs. now).
RELENG_7 amd64 2010/01/09 -- primary HTTP, pri DNS, SSH server + ZFS
515/1930/2445 mbufs in use (current/cache/total)
512/540/1052/25600 mbuf clusters in use (current/cache/total/max)
1152K/6394K/7547K bytes allocated to network (current/cache/total)
RELENG_7 amd64 2010/01/11 -- secondary DNS, MySQL, dev box + ZFS
514/1151/1665 mbufs in use (current/cache/total)
512/504/1016/25600 mbuf clusters in use (current/cache/total/max)
1152K/2203K/3356K bytes allocated to network (current/cache/total)
RELENG_7 i386 2008/04/19 -- secondary HTTP, SSH server, heavy memory I/O
515/820/1335 mbufs in use (current/cache/total)
513/631/1144/25600 mbuf clusters in use (current/cache/total/max)
1154K/2615K/3769K bytes allocated to network (current/cache/total)
RELENG_8 amd64 2010/02/02 -- central backups + NFS+ZFS-based filer
1572/3423/4995 mbufs in use (current/cache/total)
1539/3089/4628/25600 mbuf clusters in use (current/cache/total/max)
3471K/7449K/10920K bytes allocated to network (current/cache/total)
So, not much difference.
I should point out that the NFS+ZFS-based filer doesn't actually do its
backups using NFS; it uses rsnapshot (rsync) over SSH. There is intense
network I/O during backup time though, depending on how much data there
is to back up. The NFS mounts (on the clients) are only used to provide
a way for people to get access to their nightly backups in a convenient
way; it isn't used very heavily.
I can do something NFS-intensive on any of the above clients if people
want me to kind of testing. Possibly an rsync with a source of the NFS
mount and a destination of the local disk would be a good test? Let me
know if anyone's interested in me testing that.
--
| Jeremy Chadwick jdc at parodius.com |
| Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ |
| UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA |
| Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB |
More information about the freebsd-stable
mailing list