Return-Path: Received: from fieldses.org ([174.143.236.118]:51439 "EHLO fieldses.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754591Ab0LHPin (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Dec 2010 10:38:43 -0500 Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 10:38:38 -0500 From: "J. Bruce Fields" To: Mark Hills Cc: Chuck Lever , Neil Brown , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: mount.nfs timeout of 9999ms (was Re: Listen backlog set to 64) Message-ID: <20101208153838.GD32305@fieldses.org> References: <20101116182026.GA3971@fieldses.org> <20101117090826.4b2724da@notabene.brown> <20101129205935.GD9897@fieldses.org> <20101130200013.GA2108@fieldses.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 02:45:40PM +0000, Mark Hills wrote: > On Wed, 1 Dec 2010, Chuck Lever wrote: > > > On Dec 1, 2010, at 1:18 PM, Mark Hills wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 30 Nov 2010, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > > > > >> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 05:50:52PM +0000, Mark Hills wrote: > > > [...] > > >>> Our investigation brings us to rpc.mountd and mount.nfs communicating. In > > >>> the client log we see messages like: > > >>> > > >>> Nov 24 12:09:43 nyrd001 automount[3782]: >> mount.nfs: mount to NFS server 'ss1a:/mnt/raid1/banana' failed: timed out, giving up > > >>> > > >>> Using strace and isolating one of these, I can see a non-blocking connect > > >>> has already managed to make a connection and even send/receive some data. > > >>> > > >>> But soon a timeout of 9999 milliseconds in poll() causes a problem in > > >>> mount.nfs when waiting for a response of some sort. The socket in question > > >>> is a connection to mountd: > > >>> > > >>> 26512 futex(0x7ff76affa540, FUTEX_WAKE_PRIVATE, 1) = 0 > > >>> 26512 write(3, "\200\0\0(j\212\254\365\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\2\0\1\206\245\0\0\0\3\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0"..., 44) = 44 > > >>> 26512 poll([{fd=3, events=POLLIN}], 1, 9999 > > >>> > > >>> When it returns: > > >>> > > >>> 26512 <... poll resumed> ) = 0 (Timeout) > > >>> 26512 rt_sigprocmask(SIG_SETMASK, [], NULL, 8) = 0 > > >>> 26512 rt_sigprocmask(SIG_SETMASK, ~[RTMIN RT_1], [], 8) = 0 > > >>> 26512 close(3) = 0 > > >>> 26512 rt_sigprocmask(SIG_SETMASK, [], NULL, 8) = 0 > > >>> 26512 write(2, "mount.nfs: mount to NFS server '"..., 100) = 100 > > >>> > > >>> There's no re-try from here, just a failed mount. > [...] > > >> Can you tell where the mountd threads are typically waiting? > > > > > > Here's a trace from mountd. Note the long pause after fdatasync(): > > > > > > 31156 12:09:40 open("/var/lib/nfs/rmtab", O_WRONLY|O_CREAT|O_APPEND, 0666) = 14 <0.000010> > > > 31156 12:09:40 fstat(14, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0644, st_size=62642, ...}) = 0 <0.000005> > > > 31156 12:09:40 mmap(NULL, 4096, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) = 0x2af00c929000 <0.000007> > > > 31156 12:09:40 fstat(14, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0644, st_size=62642, ...}) = 0 <0.000005> > > > 31156 12:09:40 lseek(14, 62642, SEEK_SET) = 62642 <0.000006> > > > 31156 12:09:40 write(14, "192.168.14.165:/mnt/raid1/abcde_"..., 57) = 57 <0.000013> > > > 31156 12:09:40 fdatasync(14) = 0 <15.413401> > [...] > > fdatasync() will write all outstanding dirty data on that partition to > > persistent storage, not just the dirty data for that file. If /var is > > on a partition that has a lot of other activity, then this is the > > expected outcome, unfortunately. I would expect such delays to be due > > to a large amount of outstanding writes, not to periodic synchronous > > writes. > > Moving rmtab to a tmpfs, this moved the problem to another bottleneck > writing to /var, this time via syslog. > > We identified a crontab entry which uses RPM to apply updates to the > server OS at randomised times which was blocking /var for 10 seconds or > so. So is the problem that mountd ends up waiting on a synchronous write of one of those "authenticated mount request" log messages? Maybe we should downgrade those messages? On a server with a lot of clients a log on every mount call seems obnoxious. Doing it synchronously even more so (though I guess that's a problem for the syslog configuration.) > This returns the issue to giving up after the 9999 millisecond timeout > above, which I think is making the client overly sensitive. > > The affected clients are Fedora 12 distribution: nfs-utils-1.2.1-4.fc12. > We are using mount.nfs for a v3 mount over TCP. > > Locating this timeout wasn't easy. There's no '9999' in any of the > nfs-utils or glibc's rpc code. > > It turns out that the timeout originates in > nfs-utils/support/nfs/rpc_socket.c as > > #define NFSRPC_TIMEOUT_TCP (10) > > This is used to populate a struct timeval *timeout which is used and > updated by nfs_connect_nb(). Then the remaining timeout of 9999 > milliseconds is used in an RPC clnt_call operation. > > 10 seconds over TCP is simply too short to be reliable here; it's not a > long period of time for a fatal timeout. I will attempt to test on our > cluster with an extended timeout. Should this be tied to some mount option? Chuck probably knows how this is supposed to work.... --b. > > I presume that the bug is that the timeout is too short, and not that the > timeout should cause a retry in a layer above -- because re-sending the > request over reliable TCP would not make sense. > > For UDP the retries are handled inside the RPC call, clntudp_call(). In > which case, what is the reason the UDP timeout differs from TCP? And is it > also too small?