From: David Teigland <teigland@redhat.com>
To: LVM general discussion and development <linux-lvm@redhat.com>
Cc: "zkabelac@redhat.com" <zkabelac@redhat.com>,
"bmarzins@redhat.com" <bmarzins@redhat.com>,
"prajnoha@redhat.com" <prajnoha@redhat.com>,
Heming Zhao <heming.zhao@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] Discussion: performance issue on event activation mode
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2021 12:18:33 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211019171833.GB13881@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2e100f5d-6eec-a61b-004d-87b9c100f442@gmail.com>
On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 11:51:27PM +0200, Zdenek Kabelac wrote:
> The more generic solution with auto activation should likely try to 'active'
> as much found complete VGs as it can at any given moment in time.
> ATM lvm2 suffers when it's being running massively parallel - this has not
> been yet fully analyzed - but there is certainly much better throughput if
> there is limitted amount of 'parallel' executed lvm2 commands.
There a couple of possible bottlenecks that we can analyze separately:
1. the bottleneck of processing 100's or 1000's of uevents+pvscans.
2. the bottleneck of large number of concurrent vgchange -aay vgname.
The lvm-activate-vgs services completely avoid 1 by skipping them all, and
it also avoids 2 with one vgchange -aay *. So, it seems to be pretty
close to an optimal solution, but I am interested to know more precisely
which bottlenecks we're avoiding.
I believe you're suggesting that bottleneck 1 doesn't really exist, and
that we're mainly suffering from 2. If that's true, then we could
continue to utilize all the uevents+pvsans, and take advantage of them to
optimize the vgchange -aay commands.
That's an interesting idea, and we actually have the capabilities to try
that right now in my latest dev branch. The commit "hints: new pvs_online
type" will do just that. It will use the pvs_online files (created by
each uevent+pvscan) to determine which PVs to activate from.
$ pvs
PV VG Fmt Attr PSize PFree
/dev/mapper/mpatha mm lvm2 a-- <931.01g <931.00g
/dev/sdc cd lvm2 a-- <931.01g 931.00g
/dev/sdd cd lvm2 a-- <931.01g <931.01g
$ rm /run/lvm/{pvs,vgs}_online/*
$ vgchange -an
0 logical volume(s) in volume group "cd" now active
0 logical volume(s) in volume group "mm" now active
$ vgchange -aay
1 logical volume(s) in volume group "cd" now active
3 logical volume(s) in volume group "mm" now active
$ vgchange -an
0 logical volume(s) in volume group "cd" now active
0 logical volume(s) in volume group "mm" now active
$ pvscan --cache /dev/sdc
pvscan[929329] PV /dev/sdc online.
$ pvscan --cache /dev/sdd
pvscan[929330] PV /dev/sdd online.
$ vgchange -aay --config devices/hints=pvs_online
1 logical volume(s) in volume group "cd" now active
$ pvscan --cache /dev/mapper/mpatha
pvscan[929338] PV /dev/mapper/mpatha online.
$ vgchange -aay --config devices/hints=pvs_online
1 logical volume(s) in volume group "cd" now active
3 logical volume(s) in volume group "mm" now active
vgchange is activating VGs only from the PVs that have been pvscan'ed. So
if a large volume of uevents+pvscans is not actually a bottleneck, then it
looks like we could use them to optimize the vgchange commands in the
lvm-activate-vgs services. I'll set up some tests to see how it compares.
Dave
_______________________________________________
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/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-19 17:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 86+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-06 6:15 [linux-lvm] Discussion: performance issue on event activation mode heming.zhao
2021-06-06 16:35 ` Roger Heflin
2021-06-07 10:27 ` Martin Wilck
2021-06-07 15:30 ` heming.zhao
2021-06-07 15:45 ` Martin Wilck
2021-06-07 20:52 ` Roger Heflin
2021-06-07 21:30 ` David Teigland
2021-06-08 8:26 ` Martin Wilck
2021-06-08 15:39 ` David Teigland
2021-06-08 15:47 ` Martin Wilck
2021-06-08 16:02 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2021-06-08 16:05 ` Martin Wilck
2021-06-08 16:03 ` David Teigland
2021-06-08 16:07 ` Martin Wilck
2021-06-15 17:03 ` David Teigland
2021-06-15 18:21 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2021-06-16 16:18 ` heming.zhao
2021-06-16 16:38 ` David Teigland
2021-06-17 3:46 ` heming.zhao
2021-06-17 15:27 ` David Teigland
2021-06-08 16:49 ` heming.zhao
2021-06-08 16:18 ` heming.zhao
2021-06-09 4:01 ` heming.zhao
2021-06-09 5:37 ` Heming Zhao
2021-06-09 18:59 ` David Teigland
2021-06-10 17:23 ` heming.zhao
2021-06-07 15:48 ` Martin Wilck
2021-06-07 16:31 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2021-06-07 21:48 ` David Teigland
2021-06-08 12:29 ` Peter Rajnoha
2021-06-08 13:23 ` Martin Wilck
2021-06-08 13:41 ` Peter Rajnoha
2021-06-08 13:46 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2021-06-08 13:56 ` Peter Rajnoha
2021-06-08 14:23 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2021-06-08 14:48 ` Martin Wilck
2021-06-08 15:19 ` Peter Rajnoha
2021-06-08 15:39 ` Martin Wilck
2021-09-09 19:44 ` David Teigland
2021-09-10 17:38 ` Martin Wilck
2021-09-12 16:51 ` heming.zhao
2021-09-27 10:00 ` Peter Rajnoha
2021-09-27 15:38 ` David Teigland
2021-09-28 6:34 ` Martin Wilck
2021-09-28 14:42 ` David Teigland
2021-09-28 15:16 ` Martin Wilck
2021-09-28 15:31 ` Martin Wilck
2021-09-28 15:56 ` David Teigland
2021-09-28 18:03 ` Benjamin Marzinski
2021-09-28 17:42 ` Benjamin Marzinski
2021-09-28 19:15 ` Martin Wilck
2021-09-29 22:06 ` Peter Rajnoha
2021-09-30 7:51 ` Martin Wilck
2021-09-30 8:07 ` heming.zhao
2021-09-30 9:31 ` Martin Wilck
2021-09-30 11:41 ` Peter Rajnoha
2021-09-30 15:32 ` heming.zhao
2021-10-01 7:41 ` Martin Wilck
2021-10-01 8:08 ` Peter Rajnoha
2021-09-30 11:29 ` Peter Rajnoha
2021-09-30 16:04 ` David Teigland
2021-09-30 14:41 ` Benjamin Marzinski
2021-10-01 7:42 ` Martin Wilck
2021-09-29 21:53 ` Peter Rajnoha
2021-09-30 7:45 ` Martin Wilck
2021-09-29 21:39 ` Peter Rajnoha
2021-09-30 7:22 ` Martin Wilck
2021-09-30 14:26 ` David Teigland
2021-09-30 15:55 ` David Teigland
2021-10-01 8:00 ` Peter Rajnoha
2021-10-18 6:24 ` Martin Wilck
2021-10-18 15:04 ` David Teigland
2021-10-18 16:56 ` heming.zhao
2021-10-18 21:51 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2021-10-19 17:18 ` David Teigland [this message]
2021-10-20 14:40 ` Martin Wilck
2021-10-20 14:50 ` David Teigland
2021-10-20 14:54 ` Martin Wilck
2021-10-20 15:12 ` David Teigland
2021-06-07 16:40 ` David Teigland
2021-07-02 21:09 ` David Teigland
2021-07-02 21:22 ` Martin Wilck
2021-07-02 22:02 ` David Teigland
2021-07-03 11:49 ` heming.zhao
2021-07-08 10:10 ` Tom Yan
2021-07-02 21:31 ` Tom Yan
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=20211019171833.GB13881@redhat.com \
--to=teigland@redhat.com \
--cc=bmarzins@redhat.com \
--cc=heming.zhao@suse.com \
--cc=linux-lvm@redhat.com \
--cc=prajnoha@redhat.com \
--cc=zkabelac@redhat.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).