Re: Fwd: NFS , Kjournald - status D (uninterruptible sleep) -maquina lenta.

[Jan Kara]

On Mon 17-12-07 14:41:18, Denis wrote:
> 2007/12/17, Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>:
> > > Dears, I've got a double dual xeon wich sometimes is getting too slow.
> > >
> > >
> > > While i was observing one of these slowly times, I realized the time
> > > wait of processors come close to 100% and nfsd and kjournald process
> > > become to D status (uniterruptible sleep) .Does someone know why this
> > > can be happening or how can I troubleshoot it?
> > >
> > > Below is a 'draw' of my top at one of these moments.
> > >
> > > [root@cromo src]# top
> > > top - 10:59:02 up 6 days, 19:30, 17 users,  load average: 14.77, 13.46, 13.00
> > > Tasks: 189 total,   1 running, 188 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie
> > > Cpu0  :  0.0% us,  0.4% sy,  0.0% ni,  0.2% id, 98.5% wa,  0.0% hi,  0.9% si
> > > Cpu1  :  0.0% us,  0.4% sy,  0.0% ni,  0.0% id, 99.6% wa,  0.0% hi,  0.0% si
> > > Cpu2  :  0.0% us,  0.2% sy,  0.0% ni,  7.8% id, 92.0% wa,  0.0% hi,  0.0% si
> > > Cpu3  :  0.2% us,  0.8% sy,  0.0% ni,  0.0% id, 98.7% wa,  0.2% hi,  0.0% si
> >  All processors are in iowait - i.e. waiting for IO.
> >
> > > Mem:   4025540k total,  4018264k used,     7276k free,     7908k buffers
> > > Swap:  4096564k total,     3288k used,  4093276k free,  3553252k cached
> > >
> > >  3941 root      15   0     0    0    0 D    2  0.0  80:29.30 nfsd
> > >  3938 root      15   0     0    0    0 D    1  0.0  81:02.02 nfsd
> > >  2459 root      15   0     0    0    0 D    1  0.0  30:57.04 kjournald
> > >  3937 root      15   0     0    0    0 D    1  0.0  82:07.99 nfsd
> > >    96 root      15   0     0    0    0 S    0  0.0  34:12.48 kswapd0
> > >  3940 root      15   0     0    0    0 D    0  0.0  80:22.55 nfsd
> > >  3942 root      15   0     0    0    0 D    0  0.0  80:23.66 nfsd
> > >  3939 root      15   0     0    0    0 D    0  0.0  82:22.55 nfsd
> >  It seems like heavy disk/network activity. You can try running
> > vmstat 1
> >  It will print every second the situation of your memory / IO
> > subsystem. You should especially see the ---io--- column ('bi' means
> > blocks in, 'bo' blocks outputted). I guess they'd contain some
> > non-trivial values...
> 
> The output of my vmstat look like this:
> 
> procs -----------memory---------- ---swap-- -----io---- --system-- ----cpu----
>  r  b   swpd   free   buff  cache   si   so    bi    bo   in    cs us sy id wa
>  0  1   3612 239600   2828 3364300    0    0  1494  1300   10     4  0  3 80 17
>  0  1   3612 187756   2872 3413420    0    0    44 24608 4274 10679  0 12 72 17
>  0  1   3612 153196   2900 3446100    0    0    28 17248 3349  6018  0  7 72 20
>  0  4   3612 134804   2908 3453980    0    0     8 61140 1795  4528  0  3 31 65
>  1  0   3612 144592   2920 3458796    0    0     4 18972 1689  2102  0  2 37 62
>  0  2   3612  86936   2980 3512048    0    0    56 26656 4554 14563  0 13 69 18
>  0  2   3612  45424   3024 3552532    0    0    40 19076 3774  8148  0  9 71 20
>  0  1   3612  15792   3048 3579368    0    0    44 25696 4430 11954  0 12 72 16
>  0  4   3612   7892   3064 3576972    0    0    16 74808 2430 12205  0  6 57 37
>  0  1   3612  17828   3080 3581512    0    0     8 18832 2423  6117  0  5 50 45
>  1  0   3612  16944   3068 3581048    0    0    40 26816 4126 15803  0 12 66 22
>  0  0   3612  16032   3128 3578200    0    0    60 32640 5137 23987  0 15 68 17
>  1  0   3612  15664   3144 3576620    0    0    56 33200 5178 17395  0 15 71 14
>  0  5   3612   7956   3160 3573272    0    0    20 74092 2077  5504  0  4 54 41
>  0  6   3612  12212   3168 3578568    0    0     8 30936 1964  3848  0  3 42 55
>  1  1   3612  15752   3200 3579760    0    0    24 22352 2975  9692  0  8 60 32
>  0  1   3612  16696   3240 3577340    0    0    40 22496 3954 15224  0 12 71 17
>  2  0   3612  15472   3212 3576824    0    0    40 26624 4466 14382  0 13 71 16
>  1  3   3612   5908   3228 3575924    0    0    16 72304 2328  8965  0  5 39 55
>  0  1   3612  14188   3244 3579512    0    0     8 17892 2169  4147  0  4 57 39
>  0  2   3612  17136   3292 3575520    0    0    56 28100 4672 16158  0 15 69 16
> 
> 
> So, the bo, appears to be the problem.
  Yes, that means that your system is constantly writing about 30 MB/s to
disk. That's not too much but in case those writes are not sequential it
can quite easily saturate your disk (depends on what disks you have)...

> >  BTW: I guess the processes wake up eventually, don't they?
> Yes, they eventually wake up for a while and then get in
> initerruptible sleep again
> 
> Considering that the BO is the problem, what can I try to fix it?
  First, you could find out what is writing those data to disk (I guess
the load is comming over NFS since nfsds are waiting for IO too). If you'd
expect higher throughput from your disk subsystem, you can also verify that
the disk is seeking a lot (for example by blktrace).

									Honza

-- 
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/