XCP-ng
    • 카테고리
    • 최근
    • 태그
    • 인기
    • 사용자
    • 그룹
    • 등록
    • 로그인

    Alert: Control Domain Memory Usage

    예약됨 고정됨 잠김 이동됨 Solved Compute
    194 게시물 21 작성자 202.7k 조회수 16 Watching
    게시물 더 불러오는 중
    • 오래된 순
    • 최신 순
    • 가장 많은 투표
    답글
    • 토픽으로 답글
    로그인 후 답글 작성
    이 토픽은 삭제되었습니다. 토픽 관리 권한이 있는 사용자만 볼 수 있습니다.
    • R 오프라인
      r1 XCP-ng Team @borzel
      마지막 수정자:

      @borzel How frequently do you restart VMs? And what's the last dom-id? # xl list

      borzelB 1 답글 마지막 답글 답글 인용 0
      • borzelB 오프라인
        borzel XCP-ng Center Team @r1
        마지막 수정자: borzel

        @r1 in general we do not restart many of our VMs, its all very static, only manual operated

        xen19 is now rebootet (we need it in production) with kernel-alt - highest id is currently 4

        xen22 (pool master of another affected pool) - highest id is curently 30

        memory graphs of xen22
        61ef0b14-6ec2-46ea-96e6-6efbd30eb528-grafik.png

        yum.log of xen22 (Problem here also after installing kernel-4.19.19-6.0.10.1.xcpng8.1.x86_64)

        yum.log.5.gz:Dec 19 00:52:47 Updated: kernel-4.4.52-4.0.12.x86_6
        yum.log.3.gz:Nov 08 10:07:40 Updated: kernel-4.4.52-4.0.13.x86_64
        yum.log.1:Apr 10 20:31:01 Installed: kernel-4.19.19-6.0.10.1.xcpng8.1.x86_64
        yum.log.1:Aug 31 23:10:50 Updated: kernel-4.19.19-6.0.11.1.xcpng8.1.x86_64
        yum.log.1:Dec 11 18:00:54 Updated: kernel-4.19.19-6.0.12.1.xcpng8.1.x86_64
        yum.log.1:Dec 19 12:52:00 Updated: kernel-4.19.19-6.0.13.1.xcpng8.1.x86_64
        yum.log.1:Dec 19 12:54:13 Updated: kernel-4.19.19-7.0.9.1.xcpng8.2.x86_64
        
        R 1 답글 마지막 답글 답글 인용 0
        • R 오프라인
          r1 XCP-ng Team @borzel
          마지막 수정자:

          @borzel Between 4.19.19-6.0.9 to 4.19.19-6.0.10, following two patches were added.

          0001-block-cleanup-__blkdev_issue_discard.patch
          0001-block-fix-32-bit-overflow-in-__blkdev_issue_discard.patch
          

          Both are well vetted and seems stable without any further changes in them. Was there anything else updated along with kernel?

          borzelB 1 답글 마지막 답글 답글 인용 0
          • borzelB 오프라인
            borzel XCP-ng Center Team @r1
            마지막 수정자: borzel

            @r1 yes, ever line "installed" in yum.log is an Upgrade from XCP-ng.
            Problems started with XCP-ng 8.x

            stormiS 1 답글 마지막 답글 답글 인용 0
            • stormiS 오프라인
              stormi Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team @borzel
              마지막 수정자:

              @borzel did you "yum upgrade" from 7.x from 8.x?

              borzelB 1 답글 마지막 답글 답글 인용 0
              • borzelB 오프라인
                borzel XCP-ng Center Team @stormi
                마지막 수정자:

                @stormi on server xen19 I think so, on server xen22 I'm not sure

                I looked more close on my memory graphs and saw, that the memory baseline increases every night:

                "bump" every day:
                ca76f2fc-89aa-49fb-aa33-5e568070fbc4-grafik.png

                closer look in week 53:
                692a8c57-f2b5-4284-8cab-be3a045fb179-grafik.png

                Dez 31. - Jan 01.
                8a267bb0-97c3-481c-9da9-bd031093496e-grafik.png

                Our Backups run from 18.00 till 3 or 4 in the morning (including coalesce).

                --> maybe the heavy IO load leads to memory leaks "somewhere"?

                1 답글 마지막 답글 답글 인용 1
                • borzelB 오프라인
                  borzel XCP-ng Center Team
                  마지막 수정자:

                  Good news from the kernel-alt (server xen19): No RAM leaks so far 🙂

                  b6ca8f80-8bef-4dfe-9064-5823f6aba907-grafik.png

                  R 1 답글 마지막 답글 답글 인용 1
                  • olivierlambertO 오프라인
                    olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO
                    마지막 수정자:

                    At least that's consistent 🙂 Thanks for the feedback @borzel

                    1 답글 마지막 답글 답글 인용 0
                    • stormiS 오프라인
                      stormi Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team
                      마지막 수정자:

                      @borzel yum upgrade from 7.x to 8.x is not supported, so it's likely that your host isn't in a perfectly clean state.

                      This is unrelated to the memory leak, but could cause other kinds of issues. Basically, scripts that should have run during the RPM upgrade to ensure the final state is consistent with what you'd have from an ISO upgrade either don't exist or haven't been tested.

                      borzelB 1 답글 마지막 답글 답글 인용 0
                      • borzelB 오프라인
                        borzel XCP-ng Center Team @stormi
                        마지막 수정자:

                        @stormi I'm not complete sure if I did the iso upgrade or not... 😕

                        But it's a good idea to reinstall the poolmaster from scratch...

                        1 답글 마지막 답글 답글 인용 0
                        • R 오프라인
                          r1 XCP-ng Team @borzel
                          마지막 수정자:

                          @borzel I wish comparing kernel-alt and base kernel was easy to catch this... I'm sure that the tapdisk IO code is same in kernel and kernel-alt.

                          Also the 2 patches mentioned earlier are also present in base kernel of xcp-ng 8.2 as well as kernel-alt 4.19.142. They are also present for xcp-ng 8.1 base kernel, however they are not present in xcp-ng 8.1 kernel-alt.

                          Can you confirm your kernel-alt version?

                          R borzelB 2 답글 마지막 답글 답글 인용 0
                          • R 오프라인
                            r1 XCP-ng Team @r1
                            마지막 수정자:

                            @borzel Also, I somehow need to be able to reproduce the issue at lab. If you can give more details about how do you do backup, may be I can simulate something.

                            F borzelB 2 답글 마지막 답글 답글 인용 0
                            • F 오프라인
                              fasterfourier @r1
                              마지막 수정자:

                              @r1 If it helps at all, I have seen this more often on the pool master than in other pool hosts. We are using XO delta backup on 125 VMs in this pool daily. So, the master is busy doing a lot of snapshot coalesce operations (lots of iSCSI storage IO) compared to other hosts. The other host that has hit 95% control domain memory use is also IO heavy (it has some database server VMs).

                              1 답글 마지막 답글 답글 인용 0
                              • borzelB 오프라인
                                borzel XCP-ng Center Team @r1
                                마지막 수정자: borzel

                                @r1 our complete setup:

                                [FreeNAS NFS] <----shared-storage----> [Pool of 2 servers (xen22 + xen23)] ----XAPI---> [XO from sources] -----remote----> [FreeNAS NFS]

                                All [servers] are real hardware servers, no VMs involved.

                                Same chain of servers for xen19, execpt there are more pool members (and VMs).

                                1 답글 마지막 답글 답글 인용 0
                                • borzelB 오프라인
                                  borzel XCP-ng Center Team @r1
                                  마지막 수정자: borzel

                                  @r1

                                  [02:27 xen19 ~]# uname -a
                                  Linux xen19 4.19.142 #1 SMP Tue Nov 3 11:27:36 CET 2020 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
                                  
                                  [02:30 xen19 ~]# yum list installed | grep kernel
                                  kernel.x86_64                   4.19.19-7.0.9.1.xcpng8.2    @xcp-ng-updates     
                                  kernel-alt.x86_64               4.19.142-1.xcpng8.2         @xcp-ng-base 
                                  

                                  memory graph so far:

                                  ca10cb2d-fbfb-48b0-8edd-237fc56ff38f-grafik.png

                                  looking very good!!!

                                  R 1 답글 마지막 답글 답글 인용 0
                                  • R 오프라인
                                    r1 XCP-ng Team @borzel
                                    마지막 수정자:

                                    @borzel Thanks. That rules out the my suspicion on those patches. We are still working on reproducing this issue without success. We would really appreciate if you or someone from community can arrange a test hosts which shows this problem. Reason for test host is because we will have to replace the kernel multiple times to observe change.

                                    Another test users can do is to remove iscsi from equation. Run some workloads on local disks (with backups) and verify control domain memory usage.

                                    1 답글 마지막 답글 답글 인용 0
                                    • G 오프라인
                                      garyabrahams
                                      마지막 수정자:

                                      Good morning.
                                      Long time lurker, first time commenter.
                                      Just wanted to add my 2c worth to this conversation, that may assist.

                                      We are running 37 XCP-ng servers, most on Xen 8.0, mixture of Dell R630/640 and some odd Supermicro servers, and we have been experiencing this issue on some of them where DOM0 runs out of memory (free -m like the first post shows very little RAM left).

                                      We see a performance impact (but the VMS still run) with DOM0 - just trying to SSH to DOM0 / using xsconsole is slow, and then eventually DOM0's network fails and whatever we try doesn't restart the networking. When DOM0's network fails all the vms also loose network connectivity. The only resolution is to manually stop each vm via command line and then reboot the xen host.

                                      With one exception, all Xen servers that have experienced this issue generally has an uptime of at least 200 days, but the thing I find interesting is the servers that also have issues has a kubernetes data node on them.

                                      I assume something that kubernetes does is causing the issue. The boxes that do not have kubernetes on them (with 1 exception) never has had this issue.

                                      I have a spare Dell R640 that I'm currently doing some testing on to see if I can create lots of VM and do a heap of CPU/Memory/IO on it to see if I can replicate the issue and if I can try the alternative kernel to see if that makes any difference.

                                      I'll provide feedback on what I find.

                                      Gary

                                      F 1 답글 마지막 답글 답글 인용 2
                                      • olivierlambertO 오프라인
                                        olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO
                                        마지막 수정자:

                                        Thanks! feedback is vital to help us 🙂

                                        1 답글 마지막 답글 답글 인용 0
                                        • F 오프라인
                                          fasterfourier @garyabrahams
                                          마지막 수정자:

                                          FWIW, no kubernetes in our environment with this issue.

                                          G 1 답글 마지막 답글 답글 인용 0
                                          • G 오프라인
                                            garyabrahams
                                            마지막 수정자:

                                            Some feedback on some testing that I have done.
                                            I have spun up some vms and done some stress testing on them, with a combination of stress-ng, s-tui and iperf and though slow, I can see a drop over time of DOM0 free memory

                                            • 26.1.2021 -- 662 MB used -- 6307 MB free (initial)
                                            • 27.1.2021 -- 726 MB used -- 6270 MB free
                                            • 28.1.2021 11:36 AM -- 840 MB used -- 6123 MB free
                                            • 28.1.2021 12:23 AM -- 866 MB used -- 6191 MB free
                                            • 28.1.2021 3:59 PM -- 877 MB used -- 6056 MB free
                                            • 28.1.2021 4:35 PM -- 883 MB used -- 6048 MB free
                                            • 29.1.2021 7:32 AM -- 897 MB used -- 6004 MB free

                                            This is my setup - XCP-ng 18.0 standard kernel

                                            af5a7cf4-119c-4219-86e1-49cd8573f2eb-image.png

                                            Below are some notes on what I did to do this test.
                                            DOM0 Memory issue.txt

                                            I'll try now with different kernels / upgrading to XCP-ng 8.2 (both standard and alternative kernels) and see if I can continue to replicate the issue.

                                            Re: kubernetes - not sure 100% if that is causing it, it just seems to be a common factor but based on the stress testing, lots of cpu/memory/io seems to be causing DOM0 memory usage to increase.

                                            olivierlambertO 1 답글 마지막 답글 답글 인용 0
                                            • 첫 게시물
                                              마지막 게시물