[SR-Users] reload to memory is much slower and has problms after upgrade to 3.3.2 and using mem_join=1
Uri Shacked
ushacked at gmail.com
Tue Nov 27 11:37:22 CET 2012
OK
>>ok - it's 56sec or 36sec?
It was 56 sec.
Now, after recompile, when cfg mem_join=0 the reload takes 8 sec and the
shmem real used is 25% of 4Gb.
When mem_join=, the reload take 30 sec and the shmem real used is 17%.
Looks good with mem_join=1.
Thanks,
Uri
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda at gmail.com
> wrote:
> Hello,
>
>
> On 11/22/12 8:51 AM, Uri Shacked wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> >> Btw, is the reload time constant now? Even if you run couple of times?
>
> yes, the reload time is constant - 56 sec. i tested for 100 reloads in an
> hour and it was OK.
>
>
> ok - it's 56sec or 36sec?
>
>
>
> >> What are the values for 'kamctl mi get_statistics shmem:'?
>
> i configured kamailio to start with 4Gb and after reload the shmem
> (real_used) take around 30% of it.
> but, after 20 reloads it grows in 1%. so, after the 100 reloads the
> real_used take around 34%-35% of shmem.
> i made the choise to compile again with f_malloc and not use mem_join. the
> reloads are faster, it uses less real_size (12% and not 30%) and the
> increasment of it is around 1% for 5 reloads (i do 5 reloads a week). i
> will keep track on it and update.
>
> thanks a lot.
>
> Btw, what do you think? would you use f_malloc with no mem_join or
> q_malloc with join?
>
>
> Can you try with master branch? I switched to q_malloc with no debug info.
> That means the overhead should be lower and the joining faster.
>
> You can do it also with 3.3, you have to edit Makefile.defs:
> - be sure MEMDBG=0
> - replace the next block:
>
> ifeq ($(MEMDBG), 1)
> C_DEFS+= -DDBG_QM_MALLOC
> C_DEFS+= -DMEM_JOIN_FREE
> else
> C_DEFS+= -DF_MALLOC
> C_DEFS+= -DMEM_JOIN_FREE
> endif
>
> with:
>
> ifeq ($(MEMDBG), 1)
> C_DEFS+= -DDBG_QM_MALLOC
> C_DEFS+= -DMEM_JOIN_FREE
> else
> C_DEFS+= -DMEM_JOIN_FREE
> endif
>
> Practically is removal of line C_DEFS+= -DF_MALLOC
>
> Then recompile and reinstall..
>
> Cheers,
> Daniel
>
>
> BR,
> Uri
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 8:55 PM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <
> miconda at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>>
>> On 11/21/12 1:33 PM, Uri Shacked wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I recompiled with MEMDBG=1 and installed.
>> here are the results for reloading 5 million rows with MTREE:
>>
>> mem_join=1 -->takes 56 seconds and the real_used_size of shmem is around
>> 1.2Gb.
>> mem_join=0 --> takes 10 seconds and the real_used_size of shmem is around
>> 2Gb
>> does it seems normal?
>> 56 seconds is a lot of time......
>>
>> the join is done for the free operation, meaning that most of the time is
>> spent when freeing the old tree from memory. The new values will be used
>> after loading the database records, then the old tree is destroyed (this
>> involves the join operation). Also, the sip routing is not affected,
>> loading the new records and destroying old memory tree is done in the
>> MI/RPC process.
>>
>> In other words, while the MI/RPC process takes care of loading new data
>> and destroying the old one, the SIP routing is not affected at all.
>>
>> Even when the reload command is executed, the old tree is used until all
>> the records are loaded in a new tree. At that moment, the pointer to the
>> active tree is changed from the old tree to the new tree (a very simple
>> sequence of assignments, very fast). Routing will use the new tree and the
>> Mi/RPC process starts destroying the old tree.
>>
>>
>>
>> by the way, when the f_malloc was used, the size of the real_used shmem
>> was twice smaller.
>>
>>
>> The overhead when storing small values is significant for q_malloc, each
>> fragment keeping references (pointers) to file name and line where it was
>> allocated and freed. In addition it keeps information to get to previews
>> and next fragment, resulting in faster join.
>>
>> It is some space to improve, in order to make less overhead (like a
>> compile time option not to keep info about file and line of malloc/free). I
>> will think about what can be done for the next release.
>>
>> Btw, is the reload time constant now? Even if you run couple of times?
>>
>> What are the values for 'kamctl mi get_statistics shmem:'?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Daniel
>>
>>
>> Thanks.
>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 9:45 PM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <
>> miconda at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/20/12 7:34 PM, Uri Shacked wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> can you be a litle more specific of the steps of the install and where
>>> do i make the changes?
>>>
>>>
>>> in the source tree, edit the file Makefile.defs and set:
>>>
>>> MEMDBG=1
>>>
>>> then run:
>>>
>>> make all
>>> make install
>>>
>>>
>>> some words of what is the diff between f_malloc and q_malloc will be
>>> great :-).
>>>
>>>
>>> q_malloc is more debugging purposes, keeping more information for each
>>> chunk, therefore the overhead is a bit higher than with f_malloc, but
>>> because keeps more details, it is faster to find the fragments that can be
>>> joined.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Daniel
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> thanks,
>>> Uri
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 6:26 PM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <
>>> miconda at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> ok, I will look over it. At this moment the f_malloc (which is enabled
>>>> for 3.3) has a pretty inefficient mem join implementation, can you try with
>>>> q_malloc? Edit Makefile.defs and set:
>>>>
>>>> MEMDBG=1
>>>>
>>>> Then compile and install.
>>>>
>>>> The join operation should be faster, let's see if you get blocking
>>>> issues with this one.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Daniel
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 11/20/12 2:57 PM, Uri Shacked wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Daniel hi,
>>>>
>>>> I attached 2 txt files.
>>>> One with mem_join=1, the other with mem_join=0, and the info you asked
>>>> for.
>>>> Let me know if it is OK.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Uri
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <
>>>> miconda at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> if you set memjoin to 0, do you see any difference?
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you try again (with memjoin 1 as well as 0) and send the output of:
>>>>>
>>>>> kamctl mi get_statistics shmem:
>>>>>
>>>>> before executing the reload commands?
>>>>>
>>>>> When it gets to 100%, can you see which process is using the cpu and
>>>>> attach to it with:
>>>>>
>>>>> gdb /path/to/kamailio PID
>>>>>
>>>>> then do:
>>>>>
>>>>> bt full
>>>>>
>>>>> and send output here?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Daniel
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 11/18/12 4:09 PM, Uri Shacked wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> After some testing I notice the following:
>>>>> First reload of 5 million records after kamailio started took about 9
>>>>> sec.
>>>>> Second reload (4 minutes after the first one) took 60 sec.
>>>>> The third one (again about 4 minutes after the secind) got kamailio to
>>>>> use 100% cpu and after 13 minutes! i killed it.....
>>>>>
>>>>> I can understand that the memory manger works harder, still, any ideas
>>>>> on how to use mem_join and keep on reloading data.
>>>>> (in real life our data loads 5 million records once a day when almost
>>>>> no traffic. still after a few days it stops...)
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Uri
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Uri Shacked <ushacked at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am using MTREE and DIALPLAN modules to load lots of info to
>>>>>> kamailio. (6 million rows).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When kamailio was running with 3.2.1 (no mem_join=1 option), the used
>>>>>> size was increasing but the process of loading the data was fast eanough.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I upgraded to 3.3.2 and set mem_join=1. Now the loading process take
>>>>>> about 10 time longer and sometimes stops kamailio from responding to
>>>>>> traffic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any ideas?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Uri
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing listsr-users at lists.sip-router.orghttp://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Daniel-Constantin Mierla - http://www.asipto.comhttp://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Daniel-Constantin Mierla - http://www.asipto.comhttp://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Daniel-Constantin Mierla - http://www.asipto.comhttp://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Daniel-Constantin Mierla - http://www.asipto.comhttp://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
>>
>>
>
> --
> Daniel-Constantin Mierla - http://www.asipto.comhttp://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20121127/0e88f568/attachment-0001.htm>
More information about the sr-users
mailing list