Ahhhh crap, I think I see it.

Can you add: `-f 1.25` *after* the -o stuff?

like this:

`-C -m 10240 -I 20m -c 4096 -o modern,slab_chunk_max=1048576 -f 1.25`

And test that out, please? I might have to back out some over-aggressive
switches... and I keep thinking of making this particular problem (which
I'll talk about if confirmed) a startup error :(

On Fri, 12 Aug 2016, andr...@vimeo.com wrote:

> Here you go.
> Yes, 1.4.25 is running with `-C -m 10240 -I 20m -c 4096 -o 
> maxconns_fast,hash_algorithm=murmur3,lru_maintainer,lru_crawler,slab_reassign,slab_automove`.
> 1.4.30 is running with `-C -m 10240 -I 20m -c 4096 -o 
> modern,slab_chunk_max=1048576`.
>
>
> On Friday, August 12, 2016 at 2:32:59 PM UTC-4, Dormando wrote:
>       Hey,
>
>       any chance I could see `stats slabs` output as well? a lot of the data's
>       in there. Need all three: stats, stats items, stats slabs
>
>       Also, did you try 1.4.30 with `-o slab_chunk_max=1048576` as well?
>
>       thanks
>
>       On Fri, 12 Aug 2016, and...@vimeo.com wrote:
>
>       > Thanks! That's an improvement. It's still worse than older versions, 
> but it's better than 1.4.29. This time it made it up to about 1.75GB/10GB 
> used before it
>       started evicting;
>       > I left it running for another 8 hours and it got up to 2GB, but no 
> higher.
>       > Here's some stats output from the old and new versions, in case you 
> can puzzle anything out of it.
>       >
>       > Thanks,
>       >
>       > Andrew
>       >
>       >
>       > On Thursday, August 11, 2016 at 6:14:26 PM UTC-4, Dormando wrote:
>       >       Hi,
>       >
>       >       https://github.com/memcached/memcached/wiki/ReleaseNotes1430
>       >
>       >       Can you please try this? And let me know how it goes either way 
> :)
>       >
>       >       On Wed, 10 Aug 2016, dormando wrote:
>       >
>       >       > Hey,
>       >       >
>       >       > Thanks and sorry about that. I just found a bug this week 
> where the new
>       >       > code is over-allocating (though 30MB out of 10G limit seems 
> odd?)
>       >       >
>       >       > ie: with -I 2m, it would allocate 2 megabytes of memory and 
> then only use
>       >       > up to 1mb of it. A one-line fix for a missed variable 
> conversion.
>       >       >
>       >       > Will likely do a bugfix release later tonight with that and a 
> few other
>       >       > things.
>       >       >
>       >       > Will take a look at your data in hopes it's the same issue at 
> least,
>       >       > thanks!
>       >       >
>       >       > On Wed, 10 Aug 2016, and...@vimeo.com wrote:
>       >       >
>       >       > > I decided to give this a try on a production setup that has 
> a very bimodal size distribution (about a 50/50 split of 10k-100k values and 
> 1M-10M values)
>       and
>       >       lots of writes,
>       >       > > where we've been running with "-I 10m -m 10240" for a 
> while. It didn't go so great. Almost immediately there were lots and lots of 
> evictions, even
>       though the
>       >       used memory was
>       >       > > only about 30MB of the 10GB limit, and the number of active 
> keys grew very slowly. "-o slab_chunk_max=1048576" may have had some effect, 
> but it didn't
>       really
>       >       seem like it.
>       >       > > Setting "slabs automove 2" (usually 1) reduced evictions 
> about 50% but it still wasn't enough to get acceptable performance.
>       >       > > I've rolled back to 1.4.25 for the moment, but I'm 
> attaching a log with "stats" and "stats items" from yesterday. "stats sizes" 
> wasn't available due to
>       -C, and
>       >       the log isn't
>       >       > > from as long after startup as I would like, but it's what I 
> got, sorry.
>       >       > >
>       >       > > Let me know if there's anything else I can do to help.
>       >       > >
>       >       > > Thanks,
>       >       > >
>       >       > > Andrew
>       >       > >
>       >       > > On Wednesday, July 13, 2016 at 8:08:49 PM UTC-4, Dormando 
> wrote:
>       >       > >       
> https://github.com/memcached/memcached/wiki/ReleaseNotes1429
>       >       > >
>       >       > >       enjoy.
>       >       > >
>       >       > > --
>       >       > >
>       >       > > ---
>       >       > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the 
> Google Groups "memcached" group.
>       >       > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails 
> from it, send an email to memcached+...@googlegroups.com.
>       >       > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>       >       > >
>       >       > >
>       >       >
>       >       > --
>       >       >
>       >       > ---
>       >       > You received this message because you are subscribed to the 
> Google Groups "memcached" group.
>       >       > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from 
> it, send an email to memcached+...@googlegroups.com.
>       >       > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>       >       >
>       >
>       > --
>       >
>       > ---
>       > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
> Groups "memcached" group.
>       > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, 
> send an email to memcached+...@googlegroups.com.
>       > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>       >
>       >
>
> --
>
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "memcached" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to memcached+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>

-- 

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"memcached" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to memcached+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to