Ah, OK, thanks. Once this is done, how does XFS compare to the reliability and
performance of EXT3/4, in your opinion?
Gilbert
-----Original Message-----
From: daryl herzmann [mailto:akrherz@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2016 2:17 PM
To: Gilbert Sebenste <gilbert@xxxxxxx>
Cc: ldm-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ldm-users] XFS small file performance and prevent Linux OOM from
killing LDM
Hello Gilbert,
I am unsure what you are asking me. This option is only necessary for XFS and
EXT3/4 should not need it. When you install Centos, you should have the option
to select the filesystem type when creating the filesystems.
There isn't likely a means to set this on XFS created filesystems from the
system installer. This setting for XFS will be the default on new centos
7.3 installs, so you won't have to worry about it there once 7.3 gets released.
daryl
On Mon, 10 Oct 2016, Gilbert Sebenste wrote:
> Thanks, Daryl. Do you have the option to use EXT3 on install? I
> haven't tried CentOS 7 yet.
>
> Gilbert
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ldm-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ldm-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of daryl
> herzmann
> Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2016 6:37 AM
> To: ldm-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [ldm-users] XFS small file performance and prevent Linux OOM
> from killing LDM
>
> Greetings,
>
> I'd like to share two Linux admin tips that may help you with your admining
> of LDM. If you don't use the XFS filesystem nor have experienced the joy of
> Linux's Out of Memory (OOM) killer, you can safely skip this message.
>
> XFS Small File Performance
> ==========================
>
> Please, I don't wish to start a war regarding which filesystem is the best
> here... If you have used XFS (now default filesystem in RHEL7) in the past,
> you may have suffered from very poor performance with IO related to small
> files. For me and LDM, this would rear its very ugly head when I wished to
> `ldmadmin scour` the /data/ folder. It would take 4+ hours to scour out a
> days worth of NEXRAD III files. If you looked at output like sysstat, you
> would see the process at 100% iowait.
>
> I created a thread about this on the redhat community forums[1] and was
> kindly responded to by one of the XFS developers, Eric Sandeen. He wrote the
> following:
>
> This is because your xfs filesystem does not store the filetype in the
> directory, and so every inode in the tree must be stat'd (read) to
> determine the filetype when you use the "-type f" qualifier. This is
> much slower than just reading directory information. In RHEL7.3,
> mkfs.xfs will enable filetypes by default. You can do so today with
> "mkfs.xfs -n ftype=1".
>
> So what he is saying is that you have to reformat your filesystem to take
> advantage of this setting.
>
> So I did some testing and now `ldmadmin scour` takes only 4 minutes to
> transverse the NEXRAD III directory tree!
>
> Linux OOM Killer
> ================
>
> So when your Linux system starts running dangerously low on system memory,
> "it is the job of the linux 'oom killer' to sacrifice one or more processes
> in order to free up memory for the system when all else fails"[2]. Over the
> years, on heavily loaded systems I would see the `ldmd` process get killed as
> its memory footprint would be much larger than other processes running at the
> time. Of course, having ldmd get killed by the system is not cool!
>
> So there is a means to set a "score" on each Linux process to inform
> the oom killer about how it should prioritizing the killing. For
> RHEL/centos
> 6+7, this can be done by `echo -1000 > /proc/$PID/oom_score_adj`. For
> some other Linux flavours, the score should be -17 and the proc file is
> oom_adj. Google is your friend!
>
> A simple cron script like so will set this value for ldmd
> automatically each hour. (This is all on one line...)
>
> $ cat /etc/cron.d/oom_disable
> 1 * * * * root pgrep -f "ldmd" | while read PID; do echo -1000 >
> /proc/$PID/oom_score_adj; done
>
> Of course, this solution would have a small window of time between a ldm
> restart and the top of the next hour whereby the score would not be set.
> There are likely more robust solutions here I am blissfully ignorant of.
>
> later,
> daryl
>
> [1] https://access.redhat.com/discussions/476563
> [2] https://linux-mm.org/OOM_Killer
>
> --
> /**
> * daryl herzmann
> * Systems Analyst III -- Iowa Environmental Mesonet
> * https://mesonet.agron.iastate.edu
> */
>
> _______________________________________________
> NOTE: All exchanges posted to Unidata maintained email lists are recorded in
> the Unidata inquiry tracking system and made publicly available through the
> web. Users who post to any of the lists we maintain are reminded to remove
> any personal information that they do not want to be made public.
>
>
> ldm-users mailing list
> ldm-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For list information or to unsubscribe, visit:
> http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing_lists/
>
--
/**
* daryl herzmann
* Systems Analyst III -- Iowa Environmental Mesonet
* https://mesonet.agron.iastate.edu
*/
