Re: GC memory fragmentation
On Wednesday, 3 November 2021 at 06:26:49 UTC, Heromyth wrote: On Wednesday, 14 April 2021 at 12:47:22 UTC, Heromyth wrote: On Sunday, 11 April 2021 at 09:10:22 UTC, tchaloupka wrote: Hi, we're using vibe-d (on Linux) for a long running REST API server and have problem with constantly growing memory until system kills it with OOM killer. The Hunt Framework is also suffering from this. We are trying to make a simple example to illustrate it. The bug has been fixed now[1]. It's because that a moudle named ArrayList wrapped the Array in std.container.array. We use a dynamic array instead. We are not sure why this happens. [1] https://github.com/huntlabs/hunt-extra/commit/903f3b4b529097013254342fdcfac6ba5543b401 Hmm, interesting
Re: GC memory fragmentation
On Wednesday, 14 April 2021 at 12:47:22 UTC, Heromyth wrote: On Sunday, 11 April 2021 at 09:10:22 UTC, tchaloupka wrote: Hi, we're using vibe-d (on Linux) for a long running REST API server and have problem with constantly growing memory until system kills it with OOM killer. The Hunt Framework is also suffering from this. We are trying to make a simple example to illustrate it. The bug has been fixed now[1]. It's because that a moudle named ArrayList wrapped the Array in std.container.array. We use a dynamic array instead. We are not sure why this happens. [1] https://github.com/huntlabs/hunt-extra/commit/903f3b4b529097013254342fdcfac6ba5543b401
Re: GC memory fragmentation
On Sunday, 11 April 2021 at 09:10:22 UTC, tchaloupka wrote: we're using vibe-d (on Linux) for a long running REST API server [...] [...] lot of small allocations (postgresql query, result processing and REST API json serialization). I am wondering about your overall system design. Are there any "shared" data held in the REST API server which are not in the PostgreSQL database? I mean: If there are two potentially concurrent REST API calls is it necessary that these are handled both by the same operating system process?
Re: GC memory fragmentation
On Tuesday, 13 April 2021 at 12:30:13 UTC, tchaloupka wrote: Some kind of GC memory dump and analyzer tool as mentioned `Diamond` would be of tremendous help to diagnose this.. I've used bpftrace to do some of that stuff: https://theartofmachinery.com/2019/04/26/bpftrace_d_gc.html
Re: GC memory fragmentation
On Wednesday, 14 April 2021 at 12:47:22 UTC, Heromyth wrote: On Sunday, 11 April 2021 at 09:10:22 UTC, tchaloupka wrote: Hi, we're using vibe-d (on Linux) for a long running REST API server and have problem with constantly growing memory until system kills it with OOM killer. The Hunt Framework is also suffering from this. We are trying to make a simple example to illustrate it. I think this is a rather serious problem for a language saying "GC is fine" đ. Is there an issue for this?
Re: GC memory fragmentation
On Sunday, 11 April 2021 at 09:10:22 UTC, tchaloupka wrote: Hi, we're using vibe-d (on Linux) for a long running REST API server and have problem with constantly growing memory until system kills it with OOM killer. The Hunt Framework is also suffering from this. We are trying to make a simple example to illustrate it.
Re: GC memory fragmentation
On Tuesday, 13 April 2021 at 12:30:13 UTC, tchaloupka wrote: I'm not so sure if pages of small objects (or large) that are not completely empty can be reused as a new bucket or only free pages can be reused. Does anyone has some insight of this? Some kind of GC memory dump and analyzer tool as mentioned `Diamond` would be of tremendous help to diagnose this.. As now it's possible to inject own GC to runtime, I've tried to compile debug version of the GC implementation and use that to check some debugging printouts with regard to small allocations. The code I've used to simulate the behavior (with `--DRT-gcopt=incPoolSize:0`): ```D // fill 1st pool (minsize is 1MB so it's 256 pages, two small objects in each ubyte[][512] pool1; foreach (i; 0..pool1.length) pool1[i] = new ubyte[2042]; // no more space in pool1 so new one is allocated and also filled ubyte[][512] pool2; foreach (i; 0..pool2.length) pool2[i] = new ubyte[2042]; // free up first small object from first pool first page pool1[0] = null; GC.collect(); // allocate another small object pool1[0] = new ubyte[2042]; ``` And shortened result is: ``` // first pool allocations GC::malloc(gcx = 0x83f6a0, size = 2044 bits = a, ti = TypeInfo_h) Gcx::allocPage(bin = 13) Gcx::allocPage(bin = 13) Gcx::newPool(npages = 1, minPages = 256) Gcx::allocPage(bin = 13) => p = 0x7f709e75c000 // second pool allocations GC::malloc(gcx = 0x83f6a0, size = 2044 bits = a, ti = TypeInfo_h) Gcx::allocPage(bin = 13) Gcx.fullcollect() preparing mark. scan stacks. scan roots[] scan ranges[] 0x51e4e0 .. 0x53d580 free'ing free'd 0 bytes, 0 pages from 1 pools recovered small pages = 0 Gcx::allocPage(bin = 13) Gcx::newPool(npages = 1, minPages = 256) Gcx::allocPage(bin = 13) => p = 0x7f709e65c000 // collection of first item of first pool first bin GC.fullCollect() Gcx.fullcollect() preparing mark. scan stacks. scan roots[] scan ranges[] 0x51e4e0 .. 0x53d580 free'ing collecting 0x7f709e75c000 free'd 0 bytes, 0 pages from 2 pools recovered small pages = 0 // and allocation to test where it'll allocate GC::malloc(gcx = 0x83f6a0, size = 2044 bits = a, ti = TypeInfo_h) recover pool => 0x83d1a0 => p = 0x7f709e75c000 ``` So if I'm not mistaken, bins in pools are reused when there is a free space (ast last allocation reuses address from first item in first bin in first pool). I've also tested big allocations with same result. But if this is so, I don't understand why in our case there is 95% free space in the GC and it still grows from time to time. At least rate of grow is minimized with `--DRT-gcopt=incPoolSize:0` Would have to log and analyze the behavior more with a custom GC build..k
Re: GC memory fragmentation
On Tuesday, 13 April 2021 at 12:30:13 UTC, tchaloupka wrote: Some kind of GC memory dump and analyzer tool as mentioned `Diamond` would be of tremendous help to diagnose this.. You could try to get the stack traces of the allocating calls via eBPF. Maybe that leads to some new insights.
Re: GC memory fragmentation
On Monday, 12 April 2021 at 07:03:02 UTC, Sebastiaan Koppe wrote: We have similar problems, we see memory usage alternate between plateauing and then slowly growing. Until it hits the configured maximum memory for that job and the orchestrator kills it (we run multiple instances and have good failover). I have reduced the problem by refactoring some of our gc usage, but the problem still persists. On side-note, it would also be good if the GC can be aware of the max memory it is allotted so that it knows it needs to do more aggressive collections when nearing it. I knew this must be a more common problem :) What I've found in the meantime: * nice writeup of how GC actually works by Vladimir Panteleev - https://thecybershadow.net/d/Memory_Management_in_the_D_Programming_Language.pdf * described tool (https://github.com/CyberShadow/Diamond) would be very helpfull, but I assume it's for D1 and based on some old druntime fork :( * we've implemented log rotation using `std.zlib` (by just `foreach (chunk; fin.byChunk(4096).map!(x => c.compress(x))) fout.rawWrite(chunk);`) * oh boy, don't use `std.zlib.Compress` that way, it allocates each chunk and for a large files it creates large GC memory peaks that sometimes doesn't go down * rewritten using direct `etc.c.zlib` completely out of GC * currently testing with `--DRT-gcopt=incPoolSize:0` as otherwise allocated page size multiplies with number of allocated pools * 3MB by default * `profile-gc` is not much helpfull in this case as it only prints total allocated memory for each allocation on the application exit and as it's a long running service using many various libraries it's just hundreds of lines :) * I've considered to fork the process periodically, terminate it and rename the created profile statistics to at least see the differences between the states, but still not sure if it would help much * as I understand the GC it uses different algorithm for small allocations and for large objects * small (`<=2048`) * it categorizes objects to fixed set of used sizes and for each uses whole memory page as bucket with free list from which it reserves memory on request * when the bucket is full, new page is allocated and allocations are provided from that * big - similar, but it allocates N pages as a pool So If I understand it correctly when for example vibe-d initializes new fiber on some request, it's handled and fiber can be discarded it can easily lead to a scenario when fiber itself is allocated in one page, it's filled up during the request processing so new page is allocated and when cleaning, bucket with fiber cannot be cleaned up as it's added to a `TaskFiber` pool (with a fixed size). This way fiber's bucket would never be freed and easily never be used anymore during the application lifetime. I'm not so sure if pages of small objects (or large) that are not completely empty can be reused as a new bucket or only free pages can be reused. Does anyone has some insight of this? Some kind of GC memory dump and analyzer tool as mentioned `Diamond` would be of tremendous help to diagnose this..
Re: GC memory fragmentation
On Monday, 12 April 2021 at 20:50:49 UTC, Per Nordlöw wrote: more aggressive collections when nearing it. What is a more aggressive collection compared to a normal collection? Unfortunately we still have no move support in D's GC because of its impreciseness.
Re: GC memory fragmentation
On Monday, 12 April 2021 at 20:50:49 UTC, Per Nordlöw wrote: I'm surprised there is no such functionality available. It doesn't sound to me like it's that difficult to implement. Afaict, we're looking for a way to call `GC.collect()` when `GC.Status.usedSize` [1] reaches a certain threshold. I wonder how other GC-backed languages handle this. [1] https://dlang.org/phobos/core_memory.html#.GC.Stats.usedSize
Re: GC memory fragmentation
On Monday, 12 April 2021 at 07:03:02 UTC, Sebastiaan Koppe wrote: On side-note, it would also be good if the GC can be aware of the max memory it is allotted so that it knows it needs to do more aggressive collections when nearing it. I'm surprised there is no such functionality available. It doesn't sound to me like it's that difficult to implement.
Re: GC memory fragmentation
On Sunday, 11 April 2021 at 09:10:22 UTC, tchaloupka wrote: Hi, we're using vibe-d (on Linux) for a long running REST API server and have problem with constantly growing memory until system kills it with OOM killer. [...] Looks like the GC needs some love
Re: GC memory fragmentation
On Sunday, 11 April 2021 at 09:10:22 UTC, tchaloupka wrote: Hi, we're using vibe-d (on Linux) for a long running REST API server and have problem with constantly growing memory until system kills it with OOM killer. [...] But this is very bad for performance so we've prolonged the interval for example to 30 seconds and now memory still goes up (not that dramatically but still). [...] So it wastes a lot of free space which it can't return back to OS for some reason. Can these numbers be caused by memory fragmentation? There is probably a lot of small allocations (postgresql query, result processing and REST API json serialization). We have similar problems, we see memory usage alternate between plateauing and then slowly growing. Until it hits the configured maximum memory for that job and the orchestrator kills it (we run multiple instances and have good failover). I have reduced the problem by refactoring some of our gc usage, but the problem still persists. On side-note, it would also be good if the GC can be aware of the max memory it is allotted so that it knows it needs to do more aggressive collections when nearing it.
Re: GC memory fragmentation
On Sunday, 11 April 2021 at 09:10:22 UTC, tchaloupka wrote: Hi, we're using vibe-d (on Linux) for a long running REST API server and have problem with constantly growing memory until system kills it with OOM killer. Do you have a manual GC.free() in your code, maybe with a larger array? Only explanation that makes some sense is that in some operation there is required memory allocations that can't be fulfilled with current memory pool (ie due to the memory fragmentation in it) and then it allocates some data in new memory segment that can't be returned afterwards as it still holds the 'live' data. But that should be freed too at some point and GC should minimize (if another request doesn'cause allocation in the 'wrong' page again). If so, setting minPoolSize:1 could help you to control the memory usage, and if this memory is kept, you could inspect whats inside the particular pool item (at least for GC allocated stuff).
Re: GC memory fragmentation
I should have added https://dub.pm/package-format-json#build-types profileGC as build option in your dub file That will generate a profile_gc file once the program exit, a table that lists all the allocations
Re: GC memory fragmentation
On Sunday, 11 April 2021 at 13:50:12 UTC, tchaloupka wrote: On Sunday, 11 April 2021 at 12:20:39 UTC, Nathan S. wrote: One thing that comes to mind: is your application compiled as 32-bit? The garbage collector is much more likely to leak memory with a 32-bit address space since it much more likely for a random int to appear to be a pointer to the interior of a block of GC-allocated memory. Nope it's 64bit build. I've also tried to switch to precise GC with same result. Tom Try to tweak the GC, first could try with the precise one? Also try to enable GC profiling with profile:1 to know what exactly eats memory, i suspect you have a memory leak somewhere, maybe in one of the native libs you are using for your SQL queries? --- extern(C) __gshared string[] rt_options = [ "gcopt=gc:precise heapSizeFactor=1.2 profile:1" ]; ---
Re: GC memory fragmentation
On Sunday, 11 April 2021 at 12:20:39 UTC, Nathan S. wrote: One thing that comes to mind: is your application compiled as 32-bit? The garbage collector is much more likely to leak memory with a 32-bit address space since it much more likely for a random int to appear to be a pointer to the interior of a block of GC-allocated memory. Nope it's 64bit build. I've also tried to switch to precise GC with same result. Tom
Re: GC memory fragmentation
On Sunday, 11 April 2021 at 09:10:22 UTC, tchaloupka wrote: Hi, we're using vibe-d (on Linux) for a long running REST API server and have problem with constantly growing memory until system kills it with OOM killer. One thing that comes to mind: is your application compiled as 32-bit? The garbage collector is much more likely to leak memory with a 32-bit address space since it much more likely for a random int to appear to be a pointer to the interior of a block of GC-allocated memory.
GC memory fragmentation
Hi, we're using vibe-d (on Linux) for a long running REST API server and have problem with constantly growing memory until system kills it with OOM killer. First guess was some memory leak so we've added periodic call to: ```D GC.collect(); GC.minimize(); malloc_trim(0); ``` And when called very often (ie 500ms) service memory stays stable and doesn't grow, so it doesn't look as a memory leak (or at least not that fast to explain that service can go from 90MB to 900MB in 2 days). But this is very bad for performance so we've prolonged the interval for example to 30 seconds and now memory still goes up (not that dramatically but still). Stats of the GC when it growed up between 30s are these (logged after `GC.collect()` and `GC.minimize()`: ``` GC.stats: usedSize=9994864, freeSize=92765584, total=102760448 GC.stats: usedSize=11571456, freeSize=251621120, total=263192576 ``` Before the grow it has 88MB free space from 98MB total allocated. After 30s it has 239MB free from 251MB allocated. So it wastes a lot of free space which it can't return back to OS for some reason. Can these numbers be caused by memory fragmentation? There is probably a lot of small allocations (postgresql query, result processing and REST API json serialization). Only explanation that makes some sense is that in some operation there is required memory allocations that can't be fulfilled with current memory pool (ie due to the memory fragmentation in it) and then it allocates some data in new memory segment that can't be returned afterwards as it still holds the 'live' data. But that should be freed too at some point and GC should minimize (if another request doesn'cause allocation in the 'wrong' page again). But still, the amount of used vs free memory seems wrong, its a whooping 95% of free space that can't be minimized :-o. I have a problem imagining some fragmentation in it. Are there any tools that can help diagnosing this more? Also note that `malloc_trim` is not called from the GC itself and as internally used malloc handles it's own memory pool it has it's own quirks with returning unused memory back to the OS (it does it only on `free()` in some cases). See for example: http://notes.secretsauce.net/notes/2016/04/08_glibc-malloc-inefficiency.html Behavior of malloc can be controlled with `mallopt` with: ``` M_TRIM_THRESHOLD When the amount of contiguous free memory at the top of the heap grows sufficiently large, free(3) employs sbrk(2) to release this memory back to the system. (This can be useful in programs that continue to execute for a long period after freeing a significant amount of memory.) The M_TRIM_THRESHOLD parameter specifies the minimum size (in bytes) that this block of memory must reach before sbrk(2) is used to trim the heap. The default value for this parameter is 128*1024. ``` But the default is 128kB free heap memory block for trim to activate but when `malloc_trim` is called manually, a much larger block of memory is often returned. Thats puzzling too :)
