Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 26 Feb 2002 10:09:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 26 Feb 2002 10:09:38 -0500 Received: from [12.38.223.195] ([12.38.223.195]:38239 "HELO starentnetworks.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Tue, 26 Feb 2002 10:09:21 -0500 Message-ID: <3C7BA51C.8010900@sw.starentnetworks.com> Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 10:09:16 -0500 From: Brian Ristuccia User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.8) Gecko/20020204 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Chris Mason CC: Brian Ristuccia , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: kernel nfsd consuming 100% CPU on 2.4.17 and 2.4.18 with reiserfs? In-Reply-To: <3C7B9212.5050400@sw.starentnetworks.com> <2305220000.1014735355@tiny> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Chris Mason wrote: > > On Tuesday, February 26, 2002 08:48:02 AM -0500 Brian Ristuccia > wrote: > > >>It seems that kernel nfsd consumes an inordinate amount of CPU time >>during writes on this machine. With a few hundred kb/sec being written >>over NFSv3 from a 2.2.17 client, all of the nfsd threads each consume as >>much of the available CPU time as possible. On a similarly configured >>machine with ext3 instead of reiserfs, nfsd consumes much less CPU time. >> >>Is there a known issue with NFSv3 performance and reiserfs? >> > > No, it is not a known issue. Does it only happen with a 2.2.17 client, or > can you reproduce with any kernel version on the client? > I can get it to happen with 2.2.19 and 2.4.4-pre3 as well. So I'm pretty sure the NFS server is doing too much work somewhere. If it matters, it's a SMP kernel running on a dual 1ghz pIII system with 2gb of memory. The filesystem resides on a linux kernel md RAID-5 array with 6 10,000 rpm disks. It's my understanding that the a machine this large should soak out the available network or disk bandwidth long before it became CPU bound serving NFS. I also did some raw IO tests to confirm that the md block device wasn't hogging up CPU time that was getting accounted to the nfsd kernel threads. I can soak that array pretty hard without soaking the CPU. The closest machine configuration wise that I have access to is similarly configured, only with 3 disks instead of 6 and ext3 instead of reiserfs. Both machines were running exactly the same 2.4.17 image when I started having this problem. I can't reproduce the problem there, even when I do nasty things like run bonnie++ over NFS. (This isn't to say that nfsd is free on this other machine, but I'm seeing it use on the order of 2-4% CPU per nfsd thread with 8 threads and a load average of between 1 and 2 vs. 20+% and a load average of 8 on the other machine). Thanks. -- Brian Ristuccia - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/