[Users] memory issues

Mike Williams mike at mikebwilliams.com
Mon Apr 23 22:00:34 CEST 2007 


Also, on the left hand side the menu section title for the first section is 
missing. It has "_". Maybe "Main" would work?

Mike


On Monday 23 April 2007 12:10:13 Ovidiu Sas wrote:
> Let me try :-)
>
> The subtitles should be underlined (+ bigger font size) for:
> OpenSER download area
> Debian Packages
> RPM Packages
> SVN Download
> Daily Snapshots
> Embedded Platforms
>
> <br/><br/><br/>
> <different font>
> CVS Download - deprecated ....
>
>
>
> Something like: http://www.openser.org/mos/blogsection/News/
>
> Regards,
> Ovidiu Sas
>
> On 4/23/07, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <daniel at voice-system.ro> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > On 04/23/07 18:44, Ovidiu Sas wrote:
> > > Hi Daniel,
> > >
> > >
> > > Then the webpage should be updated.  It states:
> > > Daily Snapshots - This was not updated yet to SVN.
> >
> > you are right. Done.
> >
> > > Also the webpage should be reworked (font size for titles maybe) ...
> > > it is a little bit hard to read for someone not familiar with it (just
> > > my 2c).
> >
> > Any idea?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Daniel
> >
> > > Regards,
> > > Ovidiu Sas
> > >
> > > On 4/23/07, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <daniel at voice-system.ro> wrote:
> > >> Hello,
> > >>
> > >> daily snapshots are enabled now for 1.2.x as well:
> > >>
> > >> http://www.openser.org/downloads/snapshots/openser-1.2.x/
> > >>
> > >> Cheers,
> > >> Daniel
> > >>
> > >> On 04/23/07 17:47, Ovidiu Sas wrote:
> > >> > Hi Tim,
> > >> >
> > >> > Check the download page from openser website:
> > >> > http://www.openser.org/mos/view/Download/:
> > >> >
> > >> > The command that you need to run:
> > >> > svn co
> > >> > http://openser.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/openser/branches/1.2
> > >> > openser
> > >> >
> > >> > Make sure that you have svn installed.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Regards,
> > >> > Ovidiu Sas
> > >> >
> > >> > On 4/23/07, Tim Madorma <tmadorma at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >> Hi Daniel,
> > >> >>
> > >> >> I have run into a leak in 1.2 and I assume it is the same one that
> > >> >> Ovidiu ran into. I see in your response that it was "backported to
> > >> >> 1.2", but I'm not sure how to get the fix. When I look at the SVN
> > >> >> repository at:
> > >> >> http://www.openser.org/pub/openser/latest-1.2.x/, the date is
> > >> >> earlier than the date of your email exchange so I don't think the
> > >> >> fix has
> > >>
> > >> been
> > >>
> > >> >> added there. Can you please let me know how I can get it?
> > >> >>
> > >> >> thanks,
> > >> >> Tim
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On 3/23/07, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <daniel at voice-system.ro> wrote:
> > >> >> > Hello Ovidiu,
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > On 03/23/07 17:04, Ovidiu Sas wrote:
> > >> >> > > Hi Daniel,
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > Can we backport this one to 1.2?
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > already done, two minutes after the commit in trunk.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > Cheers,
> > >> >> > Daniel
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > > Regards,
> > >> >> > > Ovidiu Sas
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > On 3/22/07, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <daniel at voice-system.ro>
> > >>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >> > >> Hello,
> > >> >> > >>
> > >> >> > >> the supposed fragmentation turned out to be a mem leak in pkg.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Please
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> take the latest SVN version and try again to see if you got
> > >> >> > >> same results.
> > >> >> > >>
> > >> >> > >> Thanks,
> > >> >> > >> Daniel
> > >> >> > >>
> > >> >> > >> On 03/19/07 18:52, Christian Schlatter wrote:
> > >> >> > >> > ...
> > >> >> > >> >
> > >> >> > >> >>> The memory statistics indeed show a high number of memory
> > >> >>
> > >> >> fragments:
> > >> >> > >> >>> before 'out of memory':
> > >> >> > >> >>>
> > >> >> > >> >>> shmem:total_size = 536870912
> > >> >> > >> >>> shmem:used_size = 59607040
> > >> >> > >> >>> shmem:real_used_size = 60106488
> > >> >> > >> >>> shmem:max_used_size = 68261536
> > >> >> > >> >>> shmem:free_size = 476764424
> > >> >> > >> >>> shmem:fragments = 9897
> > >> >> > >> >>>
> > >> >> > >> >>> after 'out of memory' (about 8000 calls per process):
> > >> >> > >> >>>
> > >> >> > >> >>> shmem:total_size = 536870912
> > >> >> > >> >>> shmem:used_size = 4171160
> > >> >> > >> >>> shmem:real_used_size = 4670744
> > >> >> > >> >>> shmem:max_used_size = 68261536
> > >> >> > >> >>> shmem:free_size = 532200168
> > >> >> > >> >>> shmem:fragments = 57902
> > >> >> > >> >>>
> > >> >> > >> >>>> You can try to compile openser with -DQM_JOIN_FREE (add
> > >> >> > >> >>>> it
> > >> >>
> > >> >> in DEFS
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>> variable of Makefile.defs) and test again. Free fragments
> > >> >>
> > >> >> should be
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>> merged and fragmentation should not occur -- processing
> > >> >>
> > >> >> will be
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>> slower. We will try for next release to provide a better
> > >> >>
> > >> >> solution
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>> for that.
> > >> >> > >> >>>
> > >> >> > >> >>> Compiling openser with -DQM_JOIN_FREE did not help. I'm
> > >> >> > >> >>> not
> > >> >>
> > >> >> sure how
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >>> big of a problem this fragmentation issue is.
> > >> >> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >> What is the number of fragments with QM_JOIN_FREE after
> > >> >>
> > >> >> flooding?
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> > The numbers included above are with QM_JOIN_FREE enabled.
> > >> >> > >> >
> > >> >> > >> >>> Do you think it would make sense to restart our production
> > >> >>
> > >> >> openser
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >>> instances from time to time just to make sure they're not
> > >> >>
> > >> >> running
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >>> into this memory fragmentation limits?
> > >> >> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >> The issue will occur only when the call rate reaches the
> > >> >>
> > >> >> limits of
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >> the proxy's memory. Otherwise the chunks are reused.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Transactions and
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >> avps are rounded up to be sure there will be minimized the
> > >> >>
> > >> >> number of
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >> different sizes for memory chunks. It wasn't reported too
> > >>
> > >> often,
> > >>
> > >> >> > >> >> maybe that's why no big attention was paid to it. This
> > >> >> > >> >> memory
> > >> >>
> > >> >> system
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >> is in place since the beginning of ser. Alternative is to
> > >> >> > >> >> use
> > >> >>
> > >> >> sysv
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >> shared memory, but is much slower, along with libc private
> > >> >>
> > >> >> memory
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >> manager.
> > >> >> > >> >
> > >> >> > >> > I've done some more testing and the same out-of-memory stuff
> > >> >>
> > >> >> happens
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> > when I run sipp with 10 calls per second only. I tested with
> > >> >> > >> > 'children=1' and I only could get through about 8200 calls
> > >>
> > >> (again
> > >>
> > >> >> > >> > those 8000 calls / process). And this is with QM_JOIN_FREE
> > >> >>
> > >> >> enabled.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> > Memory statistics:
> > >> >> > >> >
> > >> >> > >> > before:
> > >> >> > >> > shmem:total_size = 536870912
> > >> >> > >> > shmem:used_size = 2311976
> > >> >> > >> > shmem:real_used_size = 2335720
> > >> >> > >> > shmem:max_used_size = 2465816
> > >> >> > >> > shmem:free_size = 534535192
> > >> >> > >> > shmem:fragments = 183
> > >> >> > >> >
> > >> >> > >> > after:
> > >> >> > >> > shmem:total_size = 536870912
> > >> >> > >> > shmem:used_size = 1853472
> > >> >> > >> > shmem:real_used_size = 1877224
> > >> >> > >> > shmem:max_used_size = 2465816
> > >> >> > >> > shmem:free_size = 534993688
> > >> >> > >> > shmem:fragments = 547
> > >> >> > >> >
> > >> >> > >> > So I'm not sure if this is really a fragmentation issue. 10
> > >> >>
> > >> >> cps surely
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> > doesn't reach the proxy's memory.
> > >> >> > >> >
> > >> >> > >> > Thoughts?
> > >> >> > >> >
> > >> >> > >> > Christian
> > >> >> > >> >
> > >> >> > >> >> Cheers,
> > >> >> > >> >> Daniel
> > >> >> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >>> thanks,
> > >> >> > >> >>> Christian
> > >> >> > >> >>>
> > >> >> > >> >>>> Cheers,
> > >> >> > >> >>>> Daniel
> > >> >> > >> >>>>
> > >> >> > >> >>>> On 03/18/07 01:21, Christian Schlatter wrote:
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> Christian Schlatter wrote:
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> ...
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>> I always had 768MB shared memory configured though, so
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>> I
> > >> >>
> > >> >> still
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>> can't explain the memory allocation errors I got. Some
> > >> >>
> > >> >> more test
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>> runs revealed that I only get these errors when using
> > >>
> > >> a more
> > >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>> production oriented config that loads more modules than
> > >> >>
> > >> >> the one
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>> posted in my earlier email. I now try to figure out
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>> what
> > >> >>
> > >> >> exactly
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>> causes these memory allocation errors that happen
> > >> >>
> > >> >> reproducibly
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>> after about 220s at 400 cps.
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> I think I found the cause for the memory allocation
> > >> >>
> > >> >> errors. As
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> soon as I include an AVP write operation in the routing
> > >> >>
> > >> >> script, I
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> get 'out of memory' messages after a certain number of
> > >>
> > >> calls
> > >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> generated with sipp.
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> The routing script to reproduce this behavior looks like
> > >> >>
> > >> >> (full
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> config available at
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> http://www.unc.edu/~cschlatt/openser/openser.cfg):
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> route{
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>         $avp(s:ct) = $ct; # commenting this line solves
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>               # the memory problem
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>         if (!method=="REGISTER") record_route();
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>         if (loose_route()) route(1);
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>         if (uri==myself) rewritehost("xx.xx.xx.xx");
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>         route(1);
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> }
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> route[1] {
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>         if (!t_relay()) sl_reply_error();
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>         exit;
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> }
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> An example log file showing the 'out of memory'
> > >>
> > >> messages is
> > >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> available at
> > >> >>
> > >> >> http://www.unc.edu/~cschlatt/openser/openser.log .
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> Some observations:
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> - The 'out of memory' messages always appear after about
> > >> >>
> > >> >> 8000 test
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> calls per worker process. One call consists of two SIP
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> transactions and six end-to-end SIP messages. An openser
> > >> >>
> > >> >> with 8
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> children handles about 64'000 calls, whereas 4 children
> > >>
> > >> only
> > >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> handle about 32'000 calls. The sipp call rate doesn't
> > >> >>
> > >> >> matter, only
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> number of calls.
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> - The 8000 calls per worker process are independent
> > >>
> > >> from the
> > >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> amount of shared memory available. Running openser with
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> -m
> > >> >>
> > >> >> 128 or
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> -m 768 does not make a difference.
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> - The more AVP writes are done in the script, the less
> > >> >>
> > >> >> calls go
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> through. It looks like each AVP write is leaking memory
> > >> >>
> > >> >> (unnoticed
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> by the memory statistics).
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> - The fifo memory statistics do not reflect the 'out of
> > >> >>
> > >> >> memory'
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> syslog messages. Even if openser does not route a
> > >>
> > >> single SIP
> > >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> message because of memory issues, the statistics still
> > >> >>
> > >> >> show a lot
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> of 'free' memory.
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> All tests were done with openser SVN 1.2 branch on
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> Ubuntu
> > >> >>
> > >> >> dapper
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> x86. I think the same is true for 1.1 version but I
> > >> >>
> > >> >> haven't tested
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> that yet.
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >> > >> >>>>> Christian
> > >> >> > >> >
> > >> >> > >> > _______________________________________________
> > >> >> > >> > Users mailing list
> > >> >> > >> > Users at openser.org
> > >> >> > >> > http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
> > >> >> > >>
> > >> >> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> >> > >> Users mailing list
> > >> >> > >> Users at openser.org
> > >> >> > >> http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > _______________________________________________
> > >> >> > Users mailing list
> > >> >> > Users at openser.org
> > >> >> > http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at openser.org
> http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users

More information about the Users mailing list