From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
To: dai.ngo@oracle.com
Cc: chuck.lever@oracle.com, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v5 0/2] nfsd: Initial implementation of NFSv4 Courteous Server
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2021 12:30:58 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211129173058.GD24258@fieldses.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b7e3aee5-9496-7ede-ca88-34287876e2f4@oracle.com>
On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 09:13:16AM -0800, dai.ngo@oracle.com wrote:
> Hi Bruce,
>
> On 11/21/21 7:04 PM, dai.ngo@oracle.com wrote:
> >
> >On 11/17/21 4:34 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> >>On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 01:46:02PM -0800, dai.ngo@oracle.com wrote:
> >>>On 11/17/21 9:59 AM, dai.ngo@oracle.com wrote:
> >>>>On 11/17/21 6:14 AM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> >>>>>On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 03:06:32PM -0800, dai.ngo@oracle.com wrote:
> >>>>>>Just a reminder that this patch is still waiting for your review.
> >>>>>Yeah, I was procrastinating and hoping yo'ud figure out the pynfs
> >>>>>failure for me....
> >>>>Last time I ran 4.0 OPEN18 test by itself and it passed. I will run
> >>>>all OPEN tests together with 5.15-rc7 to see if the problem you've
> >>>>seen still there.
> >>>I ran all tests in nfsv4.1 and nfsv4.0 with courteous and non-courteous
> >>>5.15-rc7 server.
> >>>
> >>>Nfs4.1 results are the same for both courteous and
> >>>non-courteous server:
> >>>>Of those: 0 Skipped, 0 Failed, 0 Warned, 169 Passed
> >>>Results of nfs4.0 with non-courteous server:
> >>>>Of those: 8 Skipped, 1 Failed, 0 Warned, 577 Passed
> >>>test failed: LOCK24
> >>>
> >>>Results of nfs4.0 with courteous server:
> >>>>Of those: 8 Skipped, 3 Failed, 0 Warned, 575 Passed
> >>>tests failed: LOCK24, OPEN18, OPEN30
> >>>
> >>>OPEN18 and OPEN30 test pass if each is run by itself.
> >>Could well be a bug in the tests, I don't know.
> >
> >The reason OPEN18 failed was because the test timed out waiting for
> >the reply of an OPEN call. The RPC connection used for the test was
> >configured with 15 secs timeout. Note that OPEN18 only fails when
> >the tests were run with 'all' option, this test passes if it's run
> >by itself.
> >
> >With courteous server, by the time OPEN18 runs, there are about 1026
> >courtesy 4.0 clients on the server and all of these clients have opened
> >the same file X with WRITE access. These clients were created by the
> >previous tests. After each test completed, since 4.0 does not have
> >session, the client states are not cleaned up immediately on the
> >server and are allowed to become courtesy clients.
> >
> >When OPEN18 runs (about 20 minutes after the 1st test started), it
> >sends OPEN of file X with OPEN4_SHARE_DENY_WRITE which causes the
> >server to check for conflicts with courtesy clients. The loop that
> >checks 1026 courtesy clients for share/access conflict took less
> >than 1 sec. But it took about 55 secs, on my VM, for the server
> >to expire all 1026 courtesy clients.
> >
> >I modified pynfs to configure the 4.0 RPC connection with 60 seconds
> >timeout and OPEN18 now consistently passed. The 4.0 test results are
> >now the same for courteous and non-courteous server:
> >
> >8 Skipped, 1 Failed, 0 Warned, 577 Passed
> >
> >Note that 4.1 tests do not suffer this timeout problem because the
> >4.1 clients and sessions are destroyed after each test completes.
>
> Do you want me to send the patch to increase the timeout for pynfs?
> or is there any other things you think we should do?
I don't know.
55 seconds to clean up 1026 clients is about 50ms per client, which is
pretty slow. I wonder why. I guess it's probably updating the stable
storage information. Is /var/lib/nfs/ on your server backed by a hard
drive or an SSD or something else?
I wonder if that's an argument for limiting the number of courtesy
clients.
--b.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-11-29 22:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-29 0:56 [PATCH RFC v5 0/2] nfsd: Initial implementation of NFSv4 Courteous Server Dai Ngo
2021-09-29 0:56 ` [PATCH RFC v5 1/2] fs/lock: add new callback, lm_expire_lock, to lock_manager_operations Dai Ngo
2021-09-29 0:56 ` [PATCH RFC v5 2/2] nfsd: Initial implementation of NFSv4 Courteous Server Dai Ngo
2021-10-01 20:53 ` [PATCH RFC v5 0/2] " J. Bruce Fields
2021-10-01 21:41 ` dai.ngo
2021-10-01 23:03 ` J. Bruce Fields
2021-11-16 23:06 ` dai.ngo
2021-11-17 14:14 ` J. Bruce Fields
2021-11-17 17:59 ` dai.ngo
2021-11-17 21:46 ` dai.ngo
2021-11-18 0:34 ` J. Bruce Fields
2021-11-22 3:04 ` dai.ngo
2021-11-29 17:13 ` dai.ngo
2021-11-29 17:30 ` J. Bruce Fields [this message]
2021-11-29 18:32 ` dai.ngo
2021-11-29 19:03 ` Chuck Lever III
2021-11-29 19:13 ` Bruce Fields
2021-11-29 19:39 ` dai.ngo
2021-11-29 19:36 ` dai.ngo
2021-11-29 21:01 ` dai.ngo
2021-11-29 21:10 ` Chuck Lever III
2021-11-30 0:11 ` dai.ngo
2021-11-30 1:42 ` Chuck Lever III
2021-11-30 4:08 ` Trond Myklebust
2021-11-30 4:47 ` Chuck Lever III
2021-11-30 4:57 ` Trond Myklebust
2021-11-30 7:22 ` dai.ngo
2021-11-30 13:37 ` Trond Myklebust
2021-12-01 3:52 ` dai.ngo
2021-12-01 14:19 ` bfields
2021-11-30 15:36 ` Chuck Lever III
2021-11-30 16:05 ` Bruce Fields
2021-11-30 16:14 ` Trond Myklebust
2021-11-30 19:01 ` bfields
2021-11-30 7:13 ` dai.ngo
2021-11-30 15:32 ` Bruce Fields
2021-12-01 3:50 ` dai.ngo
2021-12-01 14:36 ` Bruce Fields
2021-12-01 14:51 ` Bruce Fields
2021-12-01 18:47 ` dai.ngo
2021-12-01 19:25 ` Bruce Fields
2021-12-02 17:53 ` Chuck Lever III
2021-12-01 17:42 ` Bruce Fields
2021-12-01 18:03 ` Bruce Fields
2021-12-01 19:50 ` Bruce Fields
2021-12-03 21:22 ` Bruce Fields
2021-12-03 21:55 ` [PATCH] nfsdcld: use WAL journal for faster commits Bruce Fields
2021-12-03 22:07 ` Chuck Lever III
2021-12-03 22:39 ` Bruce Fields
2021-12-04 0:35 ` Chuck Lever III
2021-12-04 1:24 ` Bruce Fields
2021-12-06 15:46 ` Chuck Lever III
2022-01-04 22:24 ` Bruce Fields
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=20211129173058.GD24258@fieldses.org \
--to=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
--cc=dai.ngo@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
/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).