Hi Abhishek, I am still not clear as to the purpose of the tests. Can you clarify why you are using valgrind and why you think there is a memory leak?
Regards, Nithya On Thu, 6 Jun 2019 at 12:09, ABHISHEK PALIWAL <abhishpali...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Nithya, > > Here is the Setup details and test which we are doing as below: > > > One client, two gluster Server. > The client is writing and deleting one file each 15 minutes by script > test_v4.15.sh. > > IP > Server side: > 128.224.98.157 /gluster/gv0/ > 128.224.98.159 /gluster/gv0/ > > Client side: > 128.224.98.160 /gluster_mount/ > > Server side: > gluster volume create gv0 replica 2 128.224.98.157:/gluster/gv0/ > 128.224.98.159:/gluster/gv0/ force > gluster volume start gv0 > > root@128:/tmp/brick/gv0# gluster volume info > > Volume Name: gv0 > Type: Replicate > Volume ID: 7105a475-5929-4d60-ba23-be57445d97b5 > Status: Started > Snapshot Count: 0 > Number of Bricks: 1 x 2 = 2 > Transport-type: tcp > Bricks: > Brick1: 128.224.98.157:/gluster/gv0 > Brick2: 128.224.98.159:/gluster/gv0 > Options Reconfigured: > transport.address-family: inet > nfs.disable: on > performance.client-io-threads: off > > exec script: ./ps_mem.py -p 605 -w 61 > log > root@128:/# ./ps_mem.py -p 605 > Private + Shared = RAM used Program > 23668.0 KiB + 1188.0 KiB = 24856.0 KiB glusterfsd > --------------------------------- > 24856.0 KiB > ================================= > > > Client side: > mount -t glusterfs -o acl -o resolve-gids 128.224.98.157:gv0 > /gluster_mount > > > We are using the below script write and delete the file. > > *test_v4.15.sh <http://test_v4.15.sh>* > > Also the below script to see the memory increase whihle the script is > above script is running in background. > > *ps_mem.py* > > I am attaching the script files as well as the result got after testing > the scenario. > > On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 7:23 PM Nithya Balachandran <nbala...@redhat.com> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Writing to a volume should not affect glusterd. The stack you have shown >> in the valgrind looks like the memory used to initialise the structures >> glusterd uses and will free only when it is stopped. >> >> Can you provide more details to what it is you are trying to test? >> >> Regards, >> Nithya >> >> >> On Tue, 4 Jun 2019 at 15:41, ABHISHEK PALIWAL <abhishpali...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Team, >>> >>> Please respond on the issue which I raised. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Abhishek >>> >>> On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 2:46 PM ABHISHEK PALIWAL < >>> abhishpali...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Anyone please reply.... >>>> >>>> On Thu, May 16, 2019, 10:49 ABHISHEK PALIWAL <abhishpali...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Team, >>>>> >>>>> I upload some valgrind logs from my gluster 5.4 setup. This is writing >>>>> to the volume every 15 minutes. I stopped glusterd and then copy away the >>>>> logs. The test was running for some simulated days. They are zipped in >>>>> valgrind-54.zip. >>>>> >>>>> Lots of info in valgrind-2730.log. Lots of possibly lost bytes in >>>>> glusterfs and even some definitely lost bytes. >>>>> >>>>> ==2737== 1,572,880 bytes in 1 blocks are possibly lost in loss record >>>>> 391 of 391 >>>>> ==2737== at 0x4C29C25: calloc (in >>>>> /usr/lib64/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so) >>>>> ==2737== by 0xA22485E: ??? (in >>>>> /usr/lib64/glusterfs/5.4/xlator/mgmt/glusterd.so) >>>>> ==2737== by 0xA217C94: ??? (in >>>>> /usr/lib64/glusterfs/5.4/xlator/mgmt/glusterd.so) >>>>> ==2737== by 0xA21D9F8: ??? (in >>>>> /usr/lib64/glusterfs/5.4/xlator/mgmt/glusterd.so) >>>>> ==2737== by 0xA21DED9: ??? (in >>>>> /usr/lib64/glusterfs/5.4/xlator/mgmt/glusterd.so) >>>>> ==2737== by 0xA21E685: ??? (in >>>>> /usr/lib64/glusterfs/5.4/xlator/mgmt/glusterd.so) >>>>> ==2737== by 0xA1B9D8C: init (in >>>>> /usr/lib64/glusterfs/5.4/xlator/mgmt/glusterd.so) >>>>> ==2737== by 0x4E511CE: xlator_init (in >>>>> /usr/lib64/libglusterfs.so.0.0.1) >>>>> ==2737== by 0x4E8A2B8: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libglusterfs.so.0.0.1) >>>>> ==2737== by 0x4E8AAB3: glusterfs_graph_activate (in >>>>> /usr/lib64/libglusterfs.so.0.0.1) >>>>> ==2737== by 0x409C35: glusterfs_process_volfp (in /usr/sbin/glusterfsd) >>>>> ==2737== by 0x409D99: glusterfs_volumes_init (in /usr/sbin/glusterfsd) >>>>> ==2737== >>>>> ==2737== LEAK SUMMARY: >>>>> ==2737== definitely lost: 1,053 bytes in 10 blocks >>>>> ==2737== indirectly lost: 317 bytes in 3 blocks >>>>> ==2737== possibly lost: 2,374,971 bytes in 524 blocks >>>>> ==2737== still reachable: 53,277 bytes in 201 blocks >>>>> ==2737== suppressed: 0 bytes in 0 blocks >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Regards >>>>> Abhishek Paliwal >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Regards >>> Abhishek Paliwal >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Gluster-users mailing list >>> Gluster-users@gluster.org >>> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users >> >> > > -- > > > > > Regards > Abhishek Paliwal >
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@gluster.org https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users