OK. I guess we need to investigate this issue from the basics.
On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 09:02:02PM +0100, Daniel Alvarez Sanchez wrote: > With OVS 2.8 branch it never shrank when I started to delete the ports since > the DB sizes didn't grow, which makes sense to me. The conditions weren't > met for further compaction. > See attached image. > > NB: > 2018-03-07T18:25:49.269Z|00009|ovsdb_file|INFO|/opt/stack/data/ovs/ovnnb_db.db: > compacting database online (647.317 seconds old, 436 transactions, 10505382 > bytes) > 2018-03-07T18:35:51.414Z|00012|ovsdb_file|INFO|/opt/stack/data/ovs/ovnnb_db.db: > compacting database online (602.089 seconds old, 431 transactions, 29551917 > bytes) > 2018-03-07T18:45:52.263Z|00015|ovsdb_file|INFO|/opt/stack/data/ovs/ovnnb_db.db: > compacting database online (600.563 seconds old, 463 transactions, 52843231 > bytes) > 2018-03-07T18:55:53.810Z|00016|ovsdb_file|INFO|/opt/stack/data/ovs/ovnnb_db.db: > compacting database online (601.128 seconds old, 365 transactions, 57618931 > bytes) > > > SB: > 2018-03-07T18:33:24.927Z|00009|ovsdb_file|INFO|/opt/stack/data/ovs/ovnsb_db.db: > compacting database online (1102.840 seconds old, 775 transactions, > 10505486 bytes) > 2018-03-07T18:43:27.569Z|00012|ovsdb_file|INFO|/opt/stack/data/ovs/ovnsb_db.db: > compacting database online (602.394 seconds old, 445 transactions, 15293972 > bytes) > 2018-03-07T18:53:31.664Z|00015|ovsdb_file|INFO|/opt/stack/data/ovs/ovnsb_db.db: > compacting database online (603.605 seconds old, 385 transactions, 19282371 > bytes) > 2018-03-07T19:03:42.116Z|00031|ovsdb_file|INFO|/opt/stack/data/ovs/ovnsb_db.db: > compacting database online (607.542 seconds old, 371 transactions, 23538784 > bytes) > > > > > On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 7:18 PM, Daniel Alvarez Sanchez <dalva...@redhat.com> > wrote: > > > No worries, I just triggered the test now running OVS compiled out of > > 2.8 branch (2.8.3). I'll post the results and investigate too. > > > > I have just sent a patch to fix the timing issue we can see in the traces I > > posted. I applied it and it works, I believe it's good to fix as it gives > > us > > an idea of how frequent the compact is, and also to backport if you > > agree with it. > > > > Thanks! > > > > On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 7:13 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org> wrote: > > > >> OK, thanks. > >> > >> If this is a lot of trouble, let me know and I'll investigate directly > >> instead of on the basis of a suspected regression. > >> > >> On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 07:06:50PM +0100, Daniel Alvarez Sanchez wrote: > >> > All right, I'll repeat it with code in branch-2.8. > >> > Will post the results once the test finishes. > >> > Daniel > >> > > >> > On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 7:03 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org> wrote: > >> > > >> > > On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 05:53:15PM +0100, Daniel Alvarez Sanchez > >> wrote: > >> > > > Repeated the test with 1000 ports this time. See attached image. > >> > > > For some reason, the sizes grow while deleting the ports (the > >> > > > deletion task starts at around x=2500). The weird thing is why > >> > > > they keep growing and the online compact doesn't work as when > >> > > > I do it through ovs-appctl tool. > >> > > > > >> > > > I suspect this is a bug and eventually it will grow and grow unless > >> > > > we manually compact the db. > >> > > > >> > > Would you mind trying out an older ovsdb-server, for example the one > >> > > from OVS 2.8? Some of the logic in ovsdb-server around compaction > >> > > changed in OVS 2.9, so it would be nice to know whether this was a > >> > > regression or an existing bug. > >> > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list disc...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss
