All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Zdenek Kabelac <zdenek.kabelac@gmail.com>
To: LVM2 development <lvm-devel@redhat.com>,
	Pawan Sharma <sharmapawan@microsoft.com>,
	"linux-lvm@redhat.com" <linux-lvm@redhat.com>
Cc: Kapil Upadhayay <kupadhayay@microsoft.com>,
	Mitta Sai Chaithanya <mittas@microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] LVM2 : performance drop even after deleting the snapshot
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2022 12:50:33 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <91261aec-d0fd-7884-1f38-a575b4e540e2@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <PUZP153MB07512B1B646868F0F8F1D205AC259@PUZP153MB0751.APCP153.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>

Dne 13. 10. 22 v 8:53 Pawan Sharma napsal(a):
> adding this to lvm-devel mailing list also.
> 
> Regards,
> Pawan
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Pawan Sharma
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 12, 2022 10:42 PM
> *To:* linux-lvm@redhat.com <linux-lvm@redhat.com>
> *Cc:* Mitta Sai Chaithanya <mittas@microsoft.com>; Kapil Upadhayay 
> <kupadhayay@microsoft.com>
> *Subject:* LVM2 : performance drop even after deleting the snapshot
> Hi Everyone,
> 
> 
> We are evaluating lvm2 snapshots and doing performance testing on it. This is 
> what we are doing :
> 
>  1. dump some data to lvm2 volume (using fio)
>  2. take the snapshot
>  3. delete the snapshot (no IOs anywhere after creating the snapshot)
>  4. run the fio on lvm2 volume
> 
> Here as you can see, we are just creating the snapshot and immediately 
> deleting it. There are no IOs to the main volume or anywhere. When we run the 
> fio after this (step 4) and we see around 50% drop in performance with 
> reference to the number we get in step 1.
> 
> It is expected to see a performance drop if there is a snapshot because of the 
> COW. But here we deleted the snapshot, and it is not referring to any data 
> also. We should not see any performance drop here.
> 
> Could someone please help me understand this behavior. Why are we seeing the 
> performance drop in this case? It seems like we deleted the snapshot but still 
> it is not deleted, and we are paying the COW penalty.
> 
> System Info:
> 
> OS : ubuntu 18.04
> Kernel : 5.4.0
> 
> # lvm version
> LVM version:2.02.176(2) (2017-11-03)
> Library version: 1.02.145 (2017-11-03)
> Driver version:4.41.0
> 
> We also tried on latest ubuntu with newer version of LVM. We got the same 
> behavior.
> 
>

Hi

Debugging  5 year old software is likely not going to get lot of attention 
from upstream.

So please:

a) reproduce the issue with some recent  kernel & lvm2
b) take   'dmsetup table && dmsetup status'  before you run every 'fio' test 
and present here your result in some form - otherwise we can hardly see what 
is the problem.


What should be expected - if you use old/thick snapshots - when you 'drop' 
snapshot - you have your original intact LV - so results should mostly match 
results before you take the snapshot - but you clearly have to take into 
account if you use some 'SSD/NVMe' discarding and other things - so always run 
series of tests and average your results.

If you use  thin snapshot - that you can get various results depending on your 
settings of thin chunks, discard usage.

Also maybe try your benchmark with different filesystems...

Regards

Zdenek

_______________________________________________
linux-lvm mailing list
linux-lvm@redhat.com
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Zdenek Kabelac <zdenek.kabelac@gmail.com>
To: lvm-devel@redhat.com
Subject: LVM2 : performance drop even after deleting the snapshot
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2022 12:50:33 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <91261aec-d0fd-7884-1f38-a575b4e540e2@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <PUZP153MB07512B1B646868F0F8F1D205AC259@PUZP153MB0751.APCP153.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>

Dne 13. 10. 22 v 8:53 Pawan Sharma napsal(a):
> adding this to lvm-devel mailing list also.
> 
> Regards,
> Pawan
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Pawan Sharma
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 12, 2022 10:42 PM
> *To:* linux-lvm at redhat.com <linux-lvm@redhat.com>
> *Cc:* Mitta Sai Chaithanya <mittas@microsoft.com>; Kapil Upadhayay 
> <kupadhayay@microsoft.com>
> *Subject:* LVM2 : performance drop even after deleting the snapshot
> Hi Everyone,
> 
> 
> We are evaluating lvm2 snapshots and doing performance testing on it. This is 
> what we are doing :
> 
>  1. dump some data to lvm2 volume (using fio)
>  2. take the snapshot
>  3. delete the snapshot (no IOs anywhere after creating the snapshot)
>  4. run the fio on lvm2 volume
> 
> Here as you can see, we are just creating the snapshot and immediately 
> deleting it. There are no IOs to the main volume or anywhere. When we run the 
> fio after this (step 4) and we see around 50% drop in performance with 
> reference to the number we get in step 1.
> 
> It is expected to see a performance drop if there is a snapshot because of the 
> COW. But here we deleted the snapshot, and it is not referring to any data 
> also. We should not see any performance drop here.
> 
> Could?someone please help me understand this behavior. Why are we seeing the 
> performance drop in this case? It seems like we deleted the snapshot but still 
> it is not deleted, and we are paying the COW penalty.
> 
> System Info:
> 
> OS : ubuntu 18.04
> Kernel : 5.4.0
> 
> # lvm version
> LVM version:2.02.176(2) (2017-11-03)
> Library version: 1.02.145 (2017-11-03)
> Driver version:4.41.0
> 
> We also tried on latest ubuntu with newer version of LVM. We got the same 
> behavior.
> 
>

Hi

Debugging  5 year old software is likely not going to get lot of attention 
from upstream.

So please:

a) reproduce the issue with some recent  kernel & lvm2
b) take   'dmsetup table && dmsetup status'  before you run every 'fio' test 
and present here your result in some form - otherwise we can hardly see what 
is the problem.


What should be expected - if you use old/thick snapshots - when you 'drop' 
snapshot - you have your original intact LV - so results should mostly match 
results before you take the snapshot - but you clearly have to take into 
account if you use some 'SSD/NVMe' discarding and other things - so always run 
series of tests and average your results.

If you use  thin snapshot - that you can get various results depending on your 
settings of thin chunks, discard usage.

Also maybe try your benchmark with different filesystems...

Regards

Zdenek


  reply	other threads:[~2022-10-13 10:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-10-12 17:12 [linux-lvm] LVM2 : performance drop even after deleting the snapshot Pawan Sharma
2022-10-13  6:53 ` Pawan Sharma
2022-10-13  6:53   ` Pawan Sharma
2022-10-13 10:50   ` Zdenek Kabelac [this message]
2022-10-13 10:50     ` Zdenek Kabelac
2022-10-14 19:31     ` [linux-lvm] [EXTERNAL] " Mitta Sai Chaithanya
2022-10-14 19:31       ` Mitta Sai Chaithanya
2022-10-17 13:10       ` [linux-lvm] " Zdenek Kabelac
2022-10-17 13:10         ` Zdenek Kabelac
2022-10-17 13:41         ` [linux-lvm] " Erwin van Londen
2022-10-20 18:19           ` Zdenek Kabelac
2022-10-18  3:33         ` Pawan Sharma
2022-10-18  3:33           ` Pawan Sharma
2022-10-18 11:15           ` [linux-lvm] " Zdenek Kabelac
2022-10-18 11:15             ` Zdenek Kabelac
2022-10-14 19:50   ` [linux-lvm] " Roger Heflin
2022-10-14 19:50     ` Roger Heflin
2022-10-14 20:28     ` Roberto Fastec
2022-10-14 20:28       ` Roberto Fastec
2022-10-17  5:01       ` Kapil Upadhayay
2022-10-17  5:01         ` Kapil Upadhayay
2022-10-17 15:16       ` Demi Marie Obenour
2022-10-17 15:16         ` Demi Marie Obenour

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=91261aec-d0fd-7884-1f38-a575b4e540e2@gmail.com \
    --to=zdenek.kabelac@gmail.com \
    --cc=kupadhayay@microsoft.com \
    --cc=linux-lvm@redhat.com \
    --cc=lvm-devel@redhat.com \
    --cc=mittas@microsoft.com \
    --cc=sharmapawan@microsoft.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.