On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 10:12:46PM -0800, Nivedita SInghvi wrote:
> >>> I was just kind of quoting the name given by netstat: "SYNs to LISTEN
> >>> sockets dropped" (for kernel 3.0, I noticed newer kernels don't have
> >>> this stat anymore, or the name was changed). I still don't know if we
> >>> are talking about the same thing.
> >>
> [snip]
> >> I will sometimes be tripped-up by netstat's not showing a statistic
> >> with a zero value...
>
> Leandro, you should be able to do an nstat -z, it will print all
> counters even if zero. You should see something like so:
>
> ipv4]> nstat -z
> #kernel
> IpInReceives 2135 0.0
> IpInHdrErrors 0 0.0
> IpInAddrErrors 202 0.0
> ...
>
> You might want to take a look at those (your pkts may not even be
> making it to tcp) and these in particular:
>
> TcpExtSyncookiesSent 0 0.0
> TcpExtSyncookiesRecv 0 0.0
> TcpExtSyncookiesFailed 0 0.0
> TcpExtListenOverflows 0 0.0
> TcpExtListenDrops 0 0.0
> TcpExtTCPBacklogDrop 0 0.0
> TcpExtTCPMinTTLDrop 0 0.0
> TcpExtTCPDeferAcceptDrop 0 0.0
>
> If you don't have nstat on that version for some reason, download the
> latest iproute pkg. Looking at the counter names is a lot more helpful
> and precise than the netstat converstion to human consumption.
Thanks, but what about this?
pc2 $ nstat -z | grep -i drop
TcpExtLockDroppedIcmps 0 0.0
TcpExtListenDrops 0 0.0
TcpExtTCPPrequeueDropped 0 0.0
TcpExtTCPBacklogDrop 0 0.0
TcpExtTCPMinTTLDrop 0 0.0
TcpExtTCPDeferAcceptDrop 0 0.0
pc2 $ netstat -s | grep -i drop
470 outgoing packets dropped
5659740 SYNs to LISTEN sockets dropped
Is this normal?
> > Yes, I already did captures and we are definitely loosing packets
> > (including SYNs), but it looks like the amount of SYNs I'm loosing is
> > lower than the amount of long connect() times I observe. This is not
> > confirmed yet, I'm still investigating.
>
> Where did you narrow down the drop to? There are quite a few places in
> the networking stack we silently drop packets (such as the one pointed
> out earlier in this thread), although they should almost all be
> extremely low probability/NEVER type events. Do you want a patch to
> gap the most likely scenario? (I'll post that to netdev separately).
Even when that would be awesome, unfortunately there is no way I could
get permission to run a patched kernel (or even restart the servers for
that matter).
And I don't know how could I narrow down the drops in any way. What I
know is capturing traffic with tcpdump, I see some packets leaving one
server but never arriving to the new one.
Also, the hardware is not great either, I'm not sure is not responsible
for the loss. There are some errors reported by ethtool, but I don't
know exactly what they mean:
# ethtool -S eth0
NIC statistics:
tx_packets: 336978308273
rx_packets: 384108075585
tx_errors: 0
rx_errors: 194
rx_missed: 1119
align_errors: 31731
tx_single_collisions: 0
tx_multi_collisions: 0
unicast: 384108023754
broadcast: 51825
multicast: 6
tx_aborted: 0
tx_underrun: 0
Thanks!
--
Leandro Lucarella
sociomantic labs GmbH
http://www.sociomantic.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
