LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for XROOTD-L Archives


XROOTD-L Archives

XROOTD-L Archives


XROOTD-L@LISTSERV.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

XROOTD-L Home

XROOTD-L Home

XROOTD-L  March 2020

XROOTD-L March 2020

Subject:

Re: File incrementally cached in Xcache

From:

Andrew Hanushevsky <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Support use of xrootd by HEP experiments <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Mon, 9 Mar 2020 16:39:58 -0700

Content-Type:

MULTIPART/MIXED

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

TEXT/PLAIN (180 lines)

Hi Simon,

On Mon, 9 Mar 2020, Simon Liu wrote:

> Hi, Andy
>
> Here is the update, I haven't found any error from the two servers I 
> switched off async, while the other two still showing same aio errors, 
> thus I switched all async on them too.
Well, at least we have a bypass.

> In addition to that, I took look at POSIX aio on Xcache disk server, 
> here is what I have.
>
> For small file, 4G, tested aio 1024,2048,4096,8192,16384
> Native xfs and glusterfs over fuser both ok, higher aio, higher CPU 
> usage, but throughput lower
A assume the 1k, 2k, etc are segsize parameters. The higher CPU is to be 
expected as Linux softwares the POSIX aio implementation using multiple 
threads at user level. Nothing special happens in the kernel.

> For very large file, 64G, 2 times more than server memory size,
> I see the same performance/cost pattern, and with 16384 aio operations, 
> both native xfs and glusterfs i/o test stuck.
Yes, I suppose that's to be expected as the server probably ran out of 
threads and the underlying POSIX aio implementation likely doesn't deal 
with it well. Then again, was this on a single connection (i.e. one 
client)? If so, the "limit" value would apply and one should not run out 
of threads. BTW what is the thread limit for the server (it should be 
shown in the log at start-up)?

> Same tests with no aio, I see i/o performance and cost are actually 
> better.
Unfortunate, I never liked the POSIX aio implementation in Linux.

> I copied this line from Xcache setup example
> xrootd.async maxtot 16384 limit 32
Hmmm, that was Matevz take on the values. I haven't verified whether those 
are good or not. The defaults are "maxtot 4096 limit 8" which might work 
better here.

> Do you have idea which environment was used ? OS, filesystem, network etc.. ?
Well, the original aio implementation was coded for Solaris using ZFS. 
The network at the time was 1Gb per server over a 10Gb backbone but was 
upgraded to 10Gb per server over a 40Gb backbone before we switched to 
Linux servers (much higher now). It worked quite well for that combination 
as the Solaris kernel handled the asynchrnous part of the I/O. We just 
kept it for Linux while planning to reimplement either with thread queues 
per device (a large undertaking) or using the Linux-only epoll syscall 
(io_submit doesn't really work well here). That said, more importan stuff 
always comes up and it's been on the backburner for years.

One of the reasons for keeping it for Xcache is to allow better overlap of 
I/O when doing xrdcp's through he cache. People complained that the 
performance of xrdcp through the cache was worse then simply going to the 
origin server to do the xrdcp. Lot of that had to do with latency because 
xrdcp uses large block sizes and doing synchronous I/O winds up in the 
position of being a store and forward operation. The aio broke the blocks 
into smaller pieces which allowed for a faster path through the cache. I 
wasn't a fan of this approach but the complaints were pretty heavy even 
when I pointed out it was an improper use of a cache.

Thanks for the measurements. Actual figures would be nice, maybe even 
plots if you have the time.

Andy


  >
> Thanks
>
> Simon
> On 2020-03-06 4:34 p.m., Simon Liu wrote:
>> Hi, Andy
>>
>> Thanks for quick reply, indeed it's glusterfs under Xcache, but it's through fuse, in princlple aio should be supported. I'll take further look on this.
>>
>> On the other hand, this glusterfs runs replicated mode, writes from fuse goes twice to different blocks, this may affect performance.
>>
>> This problem contributes about 1-2% transfer failures, I switched 2 of Xcache servers aio off, leave the other two on, will update you when I have updates.
>>
>> thanks and have a good weekend.
>>
>> Simon
>>
>> On 3/6/2020 2:42 PM, Andrew Hanushevsky wrote:
>>> Hi Simon,
>>>
>>> I see that the cache space sits in glusterfs, right? It may be that async i/o is not supported by gluster. Could you add the directive:
>>>
>>> xrootd.async off
>>>
>>> and see if the problem persists?
>>>
>>> Andy
>>>
>>> On Fri, 6 Mar 2020, Simon Liu wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi, Andrew
>>>>
>>>> We noticed a strange issue with our Xcache instance, a file gets particaially cached each time from different client access, using the same xrdcp cmd.  All clients copy failed till full file cached. and interesting thing is that the copy in Xcache now  is correct, size and checksum.
>>>>
>>>> Here is the job log
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://can01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbigpanda.cern.ch%2Fjob%3Fpandaid%3D4659771981&amp;data=02%7C01%7C%7C92e4d852f6dd4baefd9808d7c21f9c35%7Cc20535109cb34679a2d38f442e03b587%7C1%7C0%7C637191313333037445&amp;sdata=EhqpU9O7RUw78gaFvNi4cRYrfHd2hSnXJBhY42VxHBM%3D&amp;reserved=0
>>>> 2020-03-02 14:51:05,903 | INFO     | copytool_in         | pilot.copytool.xrdcp             | _resolve_checksum_option  | Use --cksum adler32:print option to get the checksum for xrdcp command
>>>> 2020-03-02 14:51:05,903 | INFO     | copytool_in         | pilot.util.container             | execute                   | executing command: xrdcp -np -f --cksum adler32:print root://atxcache.lcg.triumf.ca:1094//root://xrootd.lcg.triumf.ca:1094//atlas/atlasdatadisk/rucio/mc16_13TeV/7e/be/DAOD_EXOT4.20012950._001037.pool.root.1 /home/condor/execute/dir_22570/atlas_k9L2RKT8/PanDA_Pilot-4659771981/DAOD_EXOT4.20012950._001037.pool.root.1
>>>> 2020-03-02 14:51:45,264 | INFO     | copytool_in         | pilot.copytool.xrdcp             | _stagefile                | rcode=54, stdout=, stderr=Run: [ERROR] Server responded with an error: [3007] XrdXrootdAio: Unable to read /root:/xrootd.lcg.triumf.ca:1094/atlas/atlasdatadisk/rucio/mc16_13TeV/7e/be/DAOD_EXOT4.20012950._001037.pool.root.1; Input/output error
>>>>
>>>> Here is the log in Xcache, other tries are similar, till full size cached.
>>>>
>>>> 200302 06:01:12 717509 XrootdXeq: atprd001.24778:[log in to unmask]<mailto:atprd001.24778:[log in to unmask]> pvt IPv4 login as e7589647.0
>>>>
>>>> 200302 06:01:12 717509 Posix_P2L: file /dev/shm/atlas/atlas/atlasdatadisk/rucio/mc16_13TeV/7e/be/DAOD_EXOT4.20012950._001037.pool.root.1.meta4 pfn2lfn /atlas/rucio/mc16_13TeV/7e/be/DAOD_EXOT4.20012950._001037.pool.root.1
>>>>
>>>> 200302 06:01:12 717509 oss_Alloc: free=470126380974040-4218299221 path=/glusterfs/xcache/meta/
>>>>
>>>> 200302 06:01:12 717509 oss_Alloc_Cache: data cache for /glusterfs/xcache/data/BB/42EB5B5E5E341F000000ce0c01cfBB010000124%
>>>>
>>>> 200302 06:01:12 717509 xrootd oss_Open_ufs: fd=16386 flags=2 mode=600 path=/glusterfs/xcache/namespace/atlas/rucio/mc16_13TeV/7e/be/DAOD_EXOT4.20012950._001037.pool.root.1
>>>>
>>>> 200302 06:01:12 717509 oss_Alloc: free=470122162674819-65536 path=/glusterfs/xcache/meta/
>>>>
>>>> 200302 06:01:13 717509 oss_Alloc_Cache: meta cache for /glusterfs/xcache/meta/BC/42EB5B5E5E341F000000ce0c01cfBC010000124%
>>>>
>>>> 200302 06:01:13 717509 xrootd oss_Open_ufs: fd=16387 flags=2 mode=600 path=/glusterfs/xcache/namespace/atlas/rucio/mc16_13TeV/7e/be/DAOD_EXOT4.20012950._001037.pool.root.1.cinfo
>>>>
>>>> 200302 06:01:14 719947 XrdFileCache_File: error File::ReadBlocksFromDisk incomplete size = 0 idx = 49 /atlas/rucio/mc16_13TeV/7e/be/DAOD_EXOT4.20012950._001037.pool.root.1
>>>>
>>>> 200302 06:01:14 719947 XrdFileCache_File: error File::Read() failed read from disk /atlas/rucio/mc16_13TeV/7e/be/DAOD_EXOT4.20012950._001037.pool.root.1
>>>>
>>>> 200302 06:01:14 719947 XrdFileCache_IO: warning IOEntireFile::Read() pass to origin, File::Read() exit status=-5, error=Input/output error root://u28@localfile:1094//atlas/rucio/mc16_13TeV/7e/be/DAOD_EXOT4.20012950._001037.pool.root.1?pss.tid=atprd001.24778:[log in to unmask]&oss.lcl=1<mailto:root://u28@localfile:1094//atlas/rucio/mc16_13TeV/7e/be/DAOD_EXOT4.20012950._001037.pool.root.1?pss.tid=atprd001.24778:[log in to unmask]&oss.lcl=1>
>>>>
>>>> 200302 06:01:14 722657 Xrootdaio: atprd001.24778:[log in to unmask]<mailto:atprd001.24778:[log in to unmask]> XrdXrootdAio: Unable to read /root:/xrootd.lcg.triumf.ca:1094/atlas/atlasdatadisk/rucio/mc16_13TeV/7e/be/DAOD_EXOT4.20012950._001037.pool.root.1; Input/output error
>>>>
>>>> 200302 06:01:15 717509 XrootdXeq: atprd001.24778:[log in to unmask]<mailto:atprd001.24778:[log in to unmask]> disc 0:00:03
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have no idea how much each time the file cached in Xcache, in dCache log, all xroot access to this file succeeded,
>>>>
>>>>         datestamp          |          client | cellname             | errorcode | transfersize | fullsize
>>>> ----------------------------+--------------------------+---------------------------------+-----------+--------------+------------
>>>> 2020-03-02 06:01:15.592-08 | 206.12.1.207             | sfa14kx_1_lun41@sfa14kx_1_lun41 |         0 |     77594624 | 4218299221
>>>> 2020-03-02 06:01:21.093-08 | 206.12.1.210             | sfa14kx_1_lun41@sfa14kx_1_lun41 |         0 |     45088768 | 4218299221
>>>> 2020-03-02 06:01:26.147-08 | 206.12.1.210             | sfa14kx_1_lun41@sfa14kx_1_lun41 |         0 |     93323264 | 4218299221
>>>> 2020-03-02 06:27:24.072-08 | 206.12.1.208             | sfa14kx_1_lun41@sfa14kx_1_lun41 |         0 |     73400320 | 4218299221
>>>> 2020-03-02 06:27:44.108-08 | 206.12.1.208             | sfa14kx_1_lun41@sfa14kx_1_lun41 |         0 |    240123904 | 4218299221
>>>> 2020-03-02 06:28:04.102-08 | 206.12.1.208             | sfa14kx_1_lun41@sfa14kx_1_lun41 |         0 |     95420416 | 4218299221
>>>> 2020-03-02 06:38:33.069-08 | 206.12.1.210             | sfa14kx_1_lun41@sfa14kx_1_lun41 |         0 |     89128960 | 4218299221
>>>> 2020-03-02 06:38:55.781-08 | 206.12.1.209             | sfa14kx_1_lun41@sfa14kx_1_lun41 |         0 |    112197632 | 4218299221
>>>> 2020-03-02 06:39:32.314-08 | 206.12.1.209             | sfa14kx_1_lun41@sfa14kx_1_lun41 |         0 |    831520768 | 4218299221
>>>> 2020-03-02 06:51:45.26-08  | 206.12.1.208             | sfa14kx_1_lun41@sfa14kx_1_lun41 |         0 |     57671680 | 4218299221
>>>> 2020-03-02 06:52:42.488-08 | 206.12.1.210             | sfa14kx_1_lun41@sfa14kx_1_lun41 |         0 |    263192576 | 4218299221
>>>> 2020-03-02 06:53:43.511-08 | 206.12.1.210             | sfa14kx_1_lun41@sfa14kx_1_lun41 |         0 |    499122176 | 4218299221
>>>> 2020-03-05 09:16:08.258-08 | 2607:f8f0:660:3:0:0:0:51 | sfa14kx_1_lun41@sfa14kx_1_lun41 |         0 |   4218299221 | 4218299221
>>>> 2020-03-05 09:16:22.397-08 | 206.12.1.209             | sfa14kx_1_lun41@sfa14kx_1_lun41 |         0 |   1740514133 | 4218299221
>>>>
>>>> The very last two tries from my tests, red one shows fullsize transfer, Xcache bypassed.
>>>>
>>>> The blue one shows the last chunk of file cached in Xcache, after that, access the file through Xcache succeeded, and no read from dCache.
>>>>
>>>> Is this known to you ?
>>>>
>>>> thanks
>>>>
>>>> Simon
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
>

########################################################################
Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list

To unsubscribe from the XROOTD-L list, click the following link:
https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=XROOTD-L&A=1

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
January 2009
December 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager

Privacy Notice, Security Notice and Terms of Use