Maybe some colleagues at IBM devel can correct me, but pagepool size should not make much difference. Afaik, it is mostly read cache data. Another think could be if using HAWC function, I am not sure in such case.
Anyhow, looking at your node name, your system seems a DSS from Lenovo so you NSD servers are running GPFS Native RAID and the reason why the pagepool is large there, not for the NSD server role itself, it is for the GNR role that caches disk tracks. Lowering will impact performance. -- Jordi Caubet Serrabou IBM Software Defined Infrastructure (SDI) and Flash Technical Sales Specialist Technical Computing and HPC IT Specialist and Architect > On 2 Feb 2022, at 14:03, Talamo Ivano Giuseppe (PSI) <ivano.tal...@psi.ch> > wrote: > > > That's true, although I would not expect the memory to be flushed for just > snapshots deletion. But it could well be a problem at snapshot creation time. > > Anyway for changing the pagepool we should contact the vendor, since this is > configured by their installation scripts, so we better have them to agree. > > > > Cheers, > > Ivano > > > > __________________________________________ > Paul Scherrer Institut > Ivano Talamo > WHGA/038 > Forschungsstrasse 111 > 5232 Villigen PSI > Schweiz > > Telefon: +41 56 310 47 11 > E-Mail: ivano.tal...@psi.ch > > > > From: gpfsug-discuss-boun...@spectrumscale.org > <gpfsug-discuss-boun...@spectrumscale.org> on behalf of Alec > <anac...@gmail.com> > Sent: Wednesday, February 2, 2022 1:41 PM > To: gpfsug main discussion list > Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] snapshots causing filesystem quiesce > > Might it be a case of being over built? In the old days you could really > mess up an Oracle DW by giving it too much RAM... It would spend all day > reading in and out data to the ram that it didn't really need, because it had > the SGA available to load the whole table. > > Perhaps the pagepool is so large that the time it takes to clear that much > RAM is the actual time out? > > My environment has only a million files but has quite a bit more storage and > has only an 8gb pagepool. Seems you are saying you have 618gb of RAM for > pagepool... Even at 8GB/second that would take 77 seconds to flush it out.. > > Perhaps drop the pagepool in half and see if your timeout adjusts accordingly? > > Alec > > >> On Wed, Feb 2, 2022, 4:09 AM Olaf Weiser <olaf.wei...@de.ibm.com> wrote: >> keep in mind... creating many snapshots... means ;-) .. you'll have to >> delete many snapshots.. >> at a certain level, which depends on #files, #directories, ~workload, >> #nodes, #networks etc.... we ve seen cases, where generating just full >> snapshots (whole file system) is the better approach instead of maintaining >> snapshots for each file set individually .. >> >> sure. this has other side effects , like space consumption etc... >> so as always.. it depends.. >> >> >> >> ----- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ----- >> Von: "Jan-Frode Myklebust" <janfr...@tanso.net> >> Gesendet von: gpfsug-discuss-boun...@spectrumscale.org >> An: "gpfsug main discussion list" <gpfsug-discuss@spectrumscale.org> >> CC: >> Betreff: [EXTERNAL] Re: [gpfsug-discuss] snapshots causing filesystem quiesce >> Datum: Mi, 2. Feb 2022 12:54 >> >> Also, if snapshotting multiple filesets, it's important to group these into >> a single mmcrsnapshot command. Then you get a single quiesce, instead of one >> per fileset. >> >> i.e. do: >> >> snapname=$(date --utc +@GMT-%Y.%m.%d-%H.%M.%S) >> mmcrsnapshot gpfs0 fileset1:$snapname,filset2:snapname,fileset3:snapname >> >> instead of: >> >> mmcrsnapshot gpfs0 fileset1:$snapname >> mmcrsnapshot gpfs0 fileset2:$snapname >> mmcrsnapshot gpfs0 fileset3:$snapname >> >> >> -jf >> >> >> On Wed, Feb 2, 2022 at 12:07 PM Jordi Caubet Serrabou >> <jordi.cau...@es.ibm.com> wrote: >> Ivano, >> >> if it happens frequently, I would recommend to open a support case. >> >> The creation or deletion of a snapshot requires a quiesce of the nodes to >> obtain a consistent point-in-time image of the file system and/or update >> some internal structures afaik. Quiesce is required for nodes at the storage >> cluster but also remote clusters. Quiesce means stop activities (incl. I/O) >> for a short period of time to get such consistent image. Also waiting to >> flush any data in-flight to disk that does not allow a consistent >> point-in-time image. >> >> Nodes receive a quiesce request and acknowledge when ready. When all nodes >> acknowledge, snapshot operation can proceed and immediately I/O can resume. >> It usually takes few seconds at most and the operation performed is short >> but time I/O is stopped depends of how long it takes to quiesce the nodes. >> If some node take longer to agree stop the activities, such node will be >> delay the completion of the quiesce and keep I/O paused on the rest. >> There could many things while some nodes delay quiesce ack. >> >> The larger the cluster, the more difficult it gets. The more network >> congestion or I/O load, the more difficult it gets. I recommend to open a >> ticket for support to try to identify the root cause of which nodes not >> acknowledge the quiesce and maybe find the root cause. If I recall some >> previous thread, default timeout was 60 seconds which match your log >> message. After such timeout, snapshot is considered failed to complete. >> >> Support might help you understand the root cause and provide some >> recommendations if it happens frequently. >> >> Best Regards, >> -- >> Jordi Caubet Serrabou >> IBM Storage Client Technical Specialist (IBM Spain) >> >> ----- Original message ----- >> From: "Talamo Ivano Giuseppe (PSI)" <ivano.tal...@psi.ch> >> Sent by: gpfsug-discuss-boun...@spectrumscale.org >> To: "gpfsug main discussion list" <gpfsug-discuss@spectrumscale.org> >> Cc: >> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [gpfsug-discuss] snapshots causing filesystem quiesce >> Date: Wed, Feb 2, 2022 11:45 AM >> >> Hello Andrew, >> >> >> >> Thanks for your questions. >> >> >> >> We're not experiencing any other issue/slowness during normal activity. >> >> The storage is a Lenovo DSS appliance with a dedicated SSD enclosure/pool >> for metadata only. >> >> >> >> The two NSD servers have 750GB of RAM and 618 are configured as pagepool. >> >> >> >> The issue we see is happening on both the two filesystems we have: >> >> >> >> - perf filesystem: >> >> - 1.8 PB size (71% in use) >> >> - 570 milions of inodes (24% in use) >> >> >> >> - tiered filesystem: >> >> - 400 TB size (34% in use) >> >> - 230 Milions of files (60% in use) >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> Ivano >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> __________________________________________ >> Paul Scherrer Institut >> Ivano Talamo >> WHGA/038 >> Forschungsstrasse 111 >> 5232 Villigen PSI >> Schweiz >> >> Telefon: +41 56 310 47 11 >> E-Mail: ivano.tal...@psi.ch >> >> >> >> >> From: gpfsug-discuss-boun...@spectrumscale.org >> <gpfsug-discuss-boun...@spectrumscale.org> on behalf of Andrew Beattie >> <abeat...@au1.ibm.com> >> Sent: Wednesday, February 2, 2022 10:33 AM >> To: gpfsug main discussion list >> Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] snapshots causing filesystem quiesce >> >> Ivano, >> >> How big is the filesystem in terms of number of files? >> How big is the filesystem in terms of capacity? >> Is the Metadata on Flash or Spinning disk? >> Do you see issues when users do an LS of the filesystem or only when you are >> doing snapshots. >> >> How much memory do the NSD servers have? >> How much is allocated to the OS / Spectrum >> Scale Pagepool >> >> Regards >> >> Andrew Beattie >> Technical Specialist - Storage for Big Data & AI >> IBM Technology Group >> IBM Australia & New Zealand >> P. +61 421 337 927 >> E. abeat...@au1.ibm.com >> >> >> >>> >>> On 2 Feb 2022, at 19:14, Talamo Ivano Giuseppe (PSI) <ivano.tal...@psi.ch> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Dear all, >>> >>> Since a while we are experiencing an issue when dealing with snapshots. >>> Basically what happens is that when deleting a fileset snapshot (and maybe >>> also when creating new ones) the filesystem becomes inaccessible on the >>> clients for the duration of the operation (can take a few minutes). >>> >>> The clients and the storage are on two different clusters, using remote >>> cluster mount for the access. >>> >>> On the log files many lines like the following appear (on both clusters): >>> Snapshot whole quiesce of SG perf from xbldssio1 on this node lasted 60166 >>> msec >>> >>> By looking around I see we're not the first one. I am wondering if that's >>> considered an unavoidable part of the snapshotting and if there's any >>> tunable that can improve the situation. Since when this occurs all the >>> clients are stuck and users are very quick to complain. >>> >>> If it can help, the clients are running GPFS 5.1.2-1 while the storage >>> cluster is on 5.1.1-0. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Ivano >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> gpfsug-discuss mailing list >> gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org >> http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss >> >> >> >> >> Salvo indicado de otro modo más arriba / Unless stated otherwise above: >> >> International Business Machines, S.A. >> >> Santa Hortensia, 26-28, 28002 Madrid >> >> Registro Mercantil de Madrid; Folio 1; Tomo 1525; Hoja M-28146 >> >> CIF A28-010791 >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> gpfsug-discuss mailing list >> gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org >> http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss >> _______________________________________________ >> gpfsug-discuss mailing list >> gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org >> http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> gpfsug-discuss mailing list >> gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org >> http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss Salvo indicado de otro modo más arriba / Unless stated otherwise above: International Business Machines, S.A. Santa Hortensia, 26-28, 28002 Madrid Registro Mercantil de Madrid; Folio 1; Tomo 1525; Hoja M-28146 CIF A28-010791
_______________________________________________ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss