From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: GC takes more than 9 hours on berlin Resent-From: Mathieu Othacehe Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2021 11:50:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: report 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org X-Debbugs-Original-To: bug-guix@gnu.org Received: via spool by submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B.163671775413756 (code B ref -1); Fri, 12 Nov 2021 11:50:02 +0000 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Nov 2021 11:49:14 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43602 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mlV3S-0003Zo-5F for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 06:49:14 -0500 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:49518) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mlV3Q-0003Zg-GF for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 06:49:13 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:45604) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mlV3Q-0000Bq-8v for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 06:49:12 -0500 Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=53196 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mlV3K-0003Du-VQ for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 06:49:11 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:Date:Subject:To:From:in-reply-to: references; bh=L6+QnlrYn47J+INqvi/3e31WWkGtQ/lDSyWSm+AW93k=; b=iReggNJs7bcFKh BBq5onFnOS7UGiCwIZ3dXGmUZ/UBu71mjK0u0A1iqhenHjSPFTalHWaOXRFWjRGzeg+hm60XAefrG socrDU2E1HwYxGaaJxyvCqLC6rqbVbORB0m4Ex8F5Lxx/9Q2062cMHP1hNHz49nBE4mN6fkm32N9L ZhRELQnln6cv2atOdfHB5+GtwYPbNuscVN58B7lIep2zfL0SEnAjmzR6PLszEq6mO4DjSCHYOI3rP 9gCgplWoVxFh/8/S9Y6AgwlyvHf392gx6RYWymzO4oFAbjjj9495Wv8PhT/FfuvFRqWA/Xo9WTBsb PTXlsn7Nq5oODAaH8KOQ==; Received: from [2a01:e0a:19b:d9a0:b4a5:c7aa:fee0:cc15] (port=60362 helo=meije) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mlV3K-0001zW-J2 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 06:49:06 -0500 From: Mathieu Othacehe Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2021 11:49:04 +0000 Message-ID: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hello, On berlin, the daily GC command is still running whereas it was started 9 hours ago. --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- guix processes [...] SessionPID: 37231 ClientPID: 37195 ClientCommand: /gnu/store/49vfv8l1j96bbd73ssbqanpnjz83arss-guix-1.3.0-11.014f1b6/libexec/guix/guile \ /gnu/store/49vfv8l1j96bbd73ssbqanpnjz83arss-guix-1.3.0-11.014f1b6/bin/guix gc -F10995116277760 --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- and --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- mathieu@berlin ~$ ps auxww|grep 37195 root 37195 0.0 0.0 183260 33440 ? Sl 03:59 0:00 /gnu/store/49vfv8l1j96bbd73ssbqanpnjz83arss-guix-1.3.0-11.014f1b6/libexec/guix/guile \ /gnu/store/49vfv8l1j96bbd73ssbqanpnjz83arss-guix-1.3.0-11.014f1b6/bin/guix gc -F10995116277760 --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- That's really problematic as it is blocking some other berlin services such as Cuirass, which has 4564 packages in its fetch queue: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- mathieu@berlin ~$ less /var/log/cuirass-remote-server.log [...] 2021-11-12T12:47:01 period update: 0 resumable, 0 failed builds. 2021-11-12T12:47:01 period update: 4564 items in the fetch queue. --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- Thanks, Mathieu From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: GC takes more than 9 hours on berlin Resent-From: Mathieu Othacehe Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2021 19:18:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.163674465412113 (code B ref 51787); Fri, 12 Nov 2021 19:18:01 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Nov 2021 19:17:34 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45986 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mlc3K-00039J-DZ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 14:17:34 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:56042) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mlc3I-000392-9X for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 14:17:33 -0500 Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=59220 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mlc3D-0005sP-3N for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 14:17:27 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:To: From; bh=d1CaP/54GIHT1n78g1ZV/QjEqV0vXxA9aC8GmXtO+b4=; b=YLf/HHNk3KIrNR3FbDyq WTvZ1esOm4qrt2kknNViSaZkzYbhhKWXKUOqZoDQlRd8cLJv16qa9Rz0wC1O2rkmsYwxb1f6OktvC 3h/Gzz+bi/Y65lqsf1qFJbCfZm2z91X289H/CF804D8DvqT1a45gxy2wfCKipiwzK6pjsUvuVPiVC WVBMzDd26FtY4rlRaTbE4ds2WoUdhrh9wfVxuV/CpPz/mY8JEQ4HyLaywncquh27xjILduYZ+f2B7 p6C192M0sTareD+azFnGlnhMOGnpRMYYjzuAitTC/7xCTbvhnuF2zRS1EbdePWkbOJNULlvuUsbbp zHd8rRwzBMl3gA==; Received: from [2a01:e0a:19b:d9a0:b4a5:c7aa:fee0:cc15] (port=60382 helo=meije) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mlc3C-0007DQ-Re for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 14:17:27 -0500 From: Mathieu Othacehe References: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2021 19:17:24 +0000 In-Reply-To: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> (Mathieu Othacehe's message of "Fri, 12 Nov 2021 11:49:04 +0000") Message-ID: <87ee7lji9n.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > mathieu@berlin ~$ ps auxww|grep 37195 > root 37195 0.0 0.0 183260 33440 ? Sl 03:59 0:00 /gnu/store/49vfv8l1j96bbd73ssbqanpnjz83arss-guix-1.3.0-11.014f1b6/libexec/guix/guile \ /gnu/store/49vfv8l1j96bbd73ssbqanpnjz83arss-guix-1.3.0-11.014f1b6/bin/guix gc -F10995116277760 I just killed this process, it was running for more than 16 hours. Mathieu From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: GC takes more than 9 hours on berlin Resent-From: zimoun Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 09:18:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Mathieu Othacehe Cc: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.163757262228129 (code B ref 51787); Mon, 22 Nov 2021 09:18:01 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Nov 2021 09:17:02 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46889 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mp5RY-0007JC-KH for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 04:17:02 -0500 Received: from mail-io1-f43.google.com ([209.85.166.43]:44659) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mp5RV-0007Ih-5n for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 04:16:55 -0500 Received: by mail-io1-f43.google.com with SMTP id f9so22208395ioo.11 for <51787@debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 01:16:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=NYCN6cozve7Z2bKbdcaLN05FFlPxkoWiVk0fgsNrHVg=; b=SgyXz5DYKuGoHuIeV86voH3w0b2IEs1Rmq8JMYhBJyTJZ00WAwBgmIuPVPvsfXsFs+ k7K3RsJiFS+a64jXWDok6xnuJnvjf7nRZSMR/STZQUdOdeTuMhiQdqH2sStqzhC+Ryp1 HhEcFarn609kJVjqKy4kImDDRnTJ59wMbC3KM0mP6YGpWmUgXrfMfT6u3JcavCf0k0TC /sxL2tkqzp7HD6XGHNS2Pq3tk9bNG+KcollRxTwHeBtYf0PeB+lMxe133KvxNFcdtZ8t t0tcXgYLo4xDxGkSzul4jeQpPvkD7+8Wgo5Mgvsd3lRGR/VFgYjUoY6/shFP/ls3gpo8 VY1Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=NYCN6cozve7Z2bKbdcaLN05FFlPxkoWiVk0fgsNrHVg=; b=VqPWvxQ7zWWZ+Fm1xyQ4pdyS0z/IZBB1rNgVq8w77AL/TZ+ynl0mXtA0eIHlSwgSUU zJvYVo0sJ561EsP44B8vDd2pnRDBr+a6sTzbCMkqKilgY0lzLRk0WMH5/e2WNm47zVD3 o3lN2zJ4K9mh5j1VXuGNTyx7tGz1mwFYnUcwC0xuBwU2GsfElx/gPnPsu7WriGBtPu7E XBpmhHToXJahvz6Wo7eo2aXPn8DbcZzlQZDwBZywnSMqJx3RyXe3IAL+hj+1sFctPLvs Yd+wMLVAbGnsr2ubRnZK64SFXTBG/ak33I2jKxmXjrZ/SJToAC3h6cRtGl2pY37iAVyI 3xJQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531LeSLemOs9eIqyrdRHajjt7yUtpOFl/tb7yxxU9ssIv3fLAP95 JwA14vgsOvAQ2Nv7isUaExs2CQUPHcJZrNECmCM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxXDPeoD8GKRtBplwk/UsVv2f608EnYiQud3/JtB60pknPiTY9ZfRYd4oZj29q6Uu5kQUQM7Wy0Wk34VSHCkfk= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6638:2bb:: with SMTP id d27mr48187375jaq.66.1637572607699; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 01:16:47 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> From: zimoun Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 10:16:36 +0100 Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hi, On Fri, 12 Nov 2021 at 12:51, Mathieu Othacehe wrote: > On berlin, the daily GC command is still running whereas it was started > 9 hours ago. > > --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- > guix processes > [...] > SessionPID: 37231 > ClientPID: 37195 > ClientCommand: /gnu/store/49vfv8l1j96bbd73ssbqanpnjz83arss-guix-1.3.0-11.014f1b6/libexec/guix/guile \ /gnu/store/49vfv8l1j96bbd73ssbqanpnjz83arss-guix-1.3.0-11.014f1b6/bin/guix gc -F10995116277760 > --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- > > and > > --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- > mathieu@berlin ~$ ps auxww|grep 37195 > root 37195 0.0 0.0 183260 33440 ? Sl 03:59 0:00 /gnu/store/49vfv8l1j96bbd73ssbqanpnjz83arss-guix-1.3.0-11.014f1b6/libexec/guix/guile \ /gnu/store/49vfv8l1j96bbd73ssbqanpnjz83arss-guix-1.3.0-11.014f1b6/bin/guix gc -F10995116277760 > --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- > > That's really problematic as it is blocking some other berlin services > such as Cuirass, which has 4564 packages in its fetch queue: > > --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- > mathieu@berlin ~$ less /var/log/cuirass-remote-server.log > [...] > 2021-11-12T12:47:01 period update: 0 resumable, 0 failed builds. > 2021-11-12T12:47:01 period update: 4564 items in the fetch queue. > --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- How is it possible to investigate? Cheers, simon From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Nov 23 12:35:02 2021 Received: (at control) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Nov 2021 17:35:02 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52203 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mpZh8-00042j-1r for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 23 Nov 2021 12:35:02 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:50422) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mpZh5-000426-T5 for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 23 Nov 2021 12:35:01 -0500 Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=55454 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mpZh0-0004TU-Eo for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 23 Nov 2021 12:34:54 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-version:Subject:From:To:Date:in-reply-to: references; bh=F9/PEvoXH/MgqS5/ebo4POBFdVg4BJK3u7y/gVR7YCM=; b=sLQSITDuCWoK9d GCwH+w1VrD4ZoSsIMgacsMKU/CLtk4RJptey+srnnrMRjQ0GMSPBdAXtXThNUlKZ5Krj9Kp5gmBWb pSA4EFJxrB+tFx7Xa7N6Iu/6cGsaBrw/76K9IxZvAWh3efXtNnufswu95kKI1e5dcCbdtkUjNHkGf NTVNHxZk/G/xJmaKQT2qmRjPamkRrtnN3PXcLao/V/d9/+KTTRndKD76fRabOx5d7ieq0i9AJNt+u 0LVAJsGaK2ryJEfxiuHQRtCCEBrk7A4pfKQc7t2q89i6OVDYwPNSiOJ64lSPwOy9UOs5EYeeUrJSQ de78KRDJrPUV2js9C8IQ==; Received: from 91-160-117-201.subs.proxad.net ([91.160.117.201]:57424 helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mpZh0-00060o-7R for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 23 Nov 2021 12:34:54 -0500 Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2021 18:34:52 +0100 Message-Id: <878rxeixmr.fsf@gnu.org> To: control@debbugs.gnu.org From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= Subject: control message for bug #51787 MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: control X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) severity 51787 important quit From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: GC takes more than 9 hours on berlin Resent-From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2021 17:49:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Mathieu Othacehe Cc: Christopher Baines , 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.163768970025514 (code B ref 51787); Tue, 23 Nov 2021 17:49:02 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Nov 2021 17:48:20 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52211 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mpZu0-0006dS-9X for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 23 Nov 2021 12:48:20 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:53382) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mpZtw-0006dA-GB for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 23 Nov 2021 12:48:18 -0500 Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=56160 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mpZtr-0006D3-0U; Tue, 23 Nov 2021 12:48:11 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:To: From; bh=D4+/pOhc4lcyyNqqozBds24SMdzwsCpWvMZZbi4l/uE=; b=WJCHv03maHI18x9v8FU8 GwW2B9/+ubBRJfRxV4wCZyznKqHXoZdxUiPVsXCQfM8COgAsaOXZaMFTbIwP4+u6zRN99Wte3KydD l69PKn0Kkbec9DwSYhbxFruA8Rr9trvqsLj9f2TOFJKeGsSLPYS3OzBxb9sgAEW4fBxOZ63ok2DDH yaBmmXHKUQodSI4DGuCPnzhU5+6wbOluwCzZvhBlkyigXUldkq3gI/DJ5HMJcwXk0B+VFYdKnNuoL jnBHDu3c6KJfJRyUWzwz5gT8Vt4RBbu9WcXuRhH4YDe91U/GIZiGiotvcfbfZ7/yq2qfU1cXaniDK dKmK1nIB9icDCA==; Received: from 91-160-117-201.subs.proxad.net ([91.160.117.201]:51615 helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mpZtq-0007WN-K0; Tue, 23 Nov 2021 12:48:10 -0500 From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= References: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2021 18:48:08 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> (Mathieu Othacehe's message of "Fri, 12 Nov 2021 11:49:04 +0000") Message-ID: <87zgpuhig7.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hello! Mathieu Othacehe skribis: > On berlin, the daily GC command is still running whereas it was started > 9 hours ago. Some data points: =E2=80=A2 I deployed on berlin the new daemon featuring the faster =E2=80= =9Cdeleting unused links=E2=80=9D phase from on Nov. 20. However, that part runs after the GC lock has been released, so it=E2= =80=99s not really relevant (but it is relevant to I/O load and GC efficiency.) =E2=80=A2 When discussing together with Chris Baines yesterday on IRC, we found that the sqlite WAL file was 8=C2=A0GiB. I later ran: PRAGMA wal_checkpoint(TRUNCATE); which emptied it immediately. However, GC time wasn=E2=80=99t particul= arly different today. =E2=80=A2 =E2=80=98db.sqlite=E2=80=99 weighs in at 19=C2=A0GiB (!) so per= haps there=E2=80=99s something to do, like the =E2=80=9CVACUUM=E2=80=9D thing maybe. Chris? =E2=80=A2 Stracing the session=E2=80=99s guix-daemon process during GC su= ggests that most of the time goes into I/O from =E2=80=98db.sqlite=E2=80=99. It=E2= =80=99s not surprising because that GC phase is basically about browsing the database, but it does seem to take a little too long for each store item. =E2=80=A2 I haven=E2=80=99t checked recently but I recall that =E2=80=98g= uix gc --list-roots=E2=80=99 (or its C++ counterpart, =E2=80=98findRoots=E2=80=99) would take ages o= n berlin because of all the GC roots Cuirass registers. It may be that an hour or so goes into enumerating GC roots. Collecting garbage, Ludo=E2=80=99. From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: GC takes more than 9 hours on berlin Resent-From: Christopher Baines Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2021 12:11:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: Mathieu Othacehe , 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.163792861929675 (code B ref 51787); Fri, 26 Nov 2021 12:11:01 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 26 Nov 2021 12:10:19 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58858 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mqa3N-0007iN-SM for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 26 Nov 2021 07:10:19 -0500 Received: from mira.cbaines.net ([212.71.252.8]:47050) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mqa3L-0007iB-Vb for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 26 Nov 2021 07:10:08 -0500 Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2a02:8010:68c1:0:8ac0:b4c7:f5c8:7caa]) by mira.cbaines.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3386927BBE9; Fri, 26 Nov 2021 12:10:07 +0000 (GMT) Received: from capella (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 03517c3f; Fri, 26 Nov 2021 12:10:06 +0000 (UTC) References: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> <87zgpuhig7.fsf@gnu.org> User-agent: mu4e 1.6.6; emacs 27.2 From: Christopher Baines Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2021 13:24:17 +0000 In-reply-to: <87zgpuhig7.fsf@gnu.org> Message-ID: <87wnkv15k3.fsf@cbaines.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Spam-Score: 0.8 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.2 (/) --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: > =E2=80=A2 When discussing together with Chris Baines yesterday on IRC, = we > found that the sqlite WAL file was 8=C2=A0GiB. I later ran: > > PRAGMA wal_checkpoint(TRUNCATE); > > which emptied it immediately. However, GC time wasn=E2=80=99t partic= ularly > different today. So, as I understand it, the WAL is made up of pages, and checking for this db, I think they're the current default size of 4096 bytes. sqlite> PRAGMA page_size; 4096 From=20looking at the code, the wal_autocheckpoint value is set to 40000: /* Increase the auto-checkpoint interval to 40000 pages. This seems enough to ensure that instantiating the NixOS system derivation is done in a single fsync(). */ if (mode =3D=3D "wal" && sqlite3_exec(db, "pragma wal_autocheckpoint = =3D 40000;", 0, 0, 0) !=3D SQLITE_OK) throwSQLiteError(db, "setting autocheckpoint interval"); https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/tree/nix/libstore/local-store.cc= #n253 This means you'd expect the WAL to be in the region of 40000*4096 bytes, or ~160MB. Assuming the autocheckpointing is keeping up... it doesn't look to be, since the file is now much larger than this. As described here [1], the automatic checkpoints are PASSIVE ones, which has the advantage of not interrupting any readers or writers, but can also do nothing if it's being blocked by readers or writers. 1: https://www.sqlite.org/wal.html#application_initiated_checkpoints What I've found while writing the Guix Build Coordinator, is that when the service is busy (usually new builds being submitted, plus lots of builds happening), the PASSIVE checkpoints aren't sufficient. To supplement them, there's a regular check that looks at the size of the WAL file, and runs a TRUNCATE checkpoint, which is a FULL checkpoint (which blocks new writers), plus truncating the WAL file once it's finished checkpointing the entire WAL. The truncating is mostly so that it's easier to monitor the size of the WAL, by checking the size of the file. I feel like I need to defend SQLite at this point. Tuning the configuration of a database to get acceptable performance is the norm, I had to tune the PostgreSQL configuration for data.guix.gnu.org to improve the performance. It's easier to get in to trouble with SQLite because it's a lower level too, and requires you to actually initiate things like checkpoints or periodic optimisation if you want them to happen. Unfortunately, I don't know enough about the internals of the daemon to say anything specific though. > =E2=80=A2 =E2=80=98db.sqlite=E2=80=99 weighs in at 19=C2=A0GiB (!) so p= erhaps there=E2=80=99s something to > do, like the =E2=80=9CVACUUM=E2=80=9D thing maybe. Chris? Doing a VACCUM might address some fragmentation and improve performance, it's probably worth trying. > =E2=80=A2 Stracing the session=E2=80=99s guix-daemon process during GC = suggests that > most of the time goes into I/O from =E2=80=98db.sqlite=E2=80=99. It= =E2=80=99s not > surprising because that GC phase is basically about browsing the > database, but it does seem to take a little too long for each store > item. At least the way I've approached finding and fixing the poor performance issues in the Guix Build Coordinator is through adding instrumentation, so just recording the time that calling particular procedures takes, and then logging if it's longer than some threshold. Since this issue is about Cuirass, there's also the possibility of avoiding the problems of a large store, by avoiding having a large store. That's what bordeaux.guix.gnu.org does, and I thought it was part of the plan for ci.guix.gnu.org (at least around a year ago)? --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQKlBAEBCgCPFiEEPonu50WOcg2XVOCyXiijOwuE9XcFAmGgzpxfFIAAAAAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldDNF ODlFRUU3NDU4RTcyMEQ5NzU0RTBCMjVFMjhBMzNCMEI4NEY1NzcRHG1haWxAY2Jh aW5lcy5uZXQACgkQXiijOwuE9XesMg//X7T5tjRMpZwOF/VJ94u+m8rUYwZ10qkc sttZnXJnXOLrw9kK1VgB2Dp5foYisDhRoXJ9LEb57tQbjwTWMcR3whD1Cs64/Urw QZa2dYRzUDuJyVTenTNU+pOedakpKhEDG2dQbAIXxCIoT50cwTxg7JZrpgT7mQa4 Cx3vxBlpucM3SeQvQlBcg36tExLqsN633kMhye8GLdpeGj23vE3tc8doi87sFa/z LuFyWXczLsor9xNuAPh9CHX+k1hRNS+7DXxV9Ie//ZQkRr3NCUIiPPswq6DyiDn5 dSWU2MgcgrksZZdNodUMLn+ohONnExpxgowVWC9jtTqFRtaym1Mh3CXF8gdoNPsq j7w3x5zpGzSnUk7hyq1uXfUWikX+C3ps4gMcZRbk5a1kHBczDIn3VOY6ooISJjhr eg6/SAujAdT9D/6Hb649EuMOUO+BgYXK1Jlmprh1IIxAifaQRp/6qaBigjnDgyJ4 EfYGgAzLhnLdQZzD0lAJP4pwnZJoRby7Ww+S4aCo2ohpe9P39lp9h3pD4dqXFROf fB8/ev9wkBxx88R7sAyzDynjC7l20Fr/3tvnkC8Uqopq06uwvmQpPzmE75z8Mf4P yRj4U5ZhJc7K6AgIqjxAzYbRHJiS8zOUCkfmj5fNLZeYh1CNnlYn2yiNyV4x6jw8 C7msGLYcll8= =rYUT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=-- From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: GC takes more than 9 hours on berlin Resent-From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2021 11:12:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Mathieu Othacehe Cc: Christopher Baines , 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.163801148823775 (code B ref 51787); Sat, 27 Nov 2021 11:12:01 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Nov 2021 11:11:28 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33043 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mqvc8-0006BP-4Y for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 27 Nov 2021 06:11:28 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:54418) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mqvbt-0006Av-0b for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 27 Nov 2021 06:11:26 -0500 Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=55030 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mqvbn-0003Yl-Np; Sat, 27 Nov 2021 06:11:07 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:To: From; bh=+3m2Sle1gqqBYI/7YhNSHeJ44maAx95sL3MLhqcFgzE=; b=rX4q/ZGLx2jVGAaCSRxr jD76ic/i+6chTG4wEOphTPy9p+iXUgcyH76ut1LXGEi5So9AUyViujWIt2+5WO4Rxt40UCVz0TLfR VNVp0canWMVqD3En5tHfS3MCbagVy1464gMwXkqR2JFbG/Obf8fUVJXGkjQrVlbWPrCDqsR1uoZv3 6CnygRb6QJWv9HMkMI6nLwEJblgaPK2/axJ5XuuqBJjV94ngCFJBUBlGAcy4G2NmANWalOkUp7Tj0 Ts6Z8wh97XQ/mRZz3kBdklzupCV4HvgDWFut2eSu9BHrK/VK44yrk6iR2D+QK+ByQ36+aPQbLXQdh CbVSn3Yi3vKczw==; Received: from 91-160-117-201.subs.proxad.net ([91.160.117.201]:58908 helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mqvbn-0003ll-EV; Sat, 27 Nov 2021 06:11:07 -0500 From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= References: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> <87zgpuhig7.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2021 12:11:04 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87zgpuhig7.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?="'s message of "Tue, 23 Nov 2021 18:48:08 +0100") Message-ID: <87ilwdam5z.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Ludovic Court=C3=A8s skribis: > =E2=80=A2 Stracing the session=E2=80=99s guix-daemon process during GC = suggests that > most of the time goes into I/O from =E2=80=98db.sqlite=E2=80=99. It= =E2=80=99s not > surprising because that GC phase is basically about browsing the > database, but it does seem to take a little too long for each store > item. Stracing the client shows that the daemon spends several seconds on a single store item occasionally: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- read(27, "gmlo\0\0\0\0", 8) =3D 8 <0.363064> read(27, "c\0\0\0\0\0\0\0", 8) =3D 8 <0.000013> read(27, "[95%] deleting '/gnu/store/p6r2jjy6frp682z3x94nvnmdh71p1p58-ecl-q= uicksearch-0.01"..., 104) =3D 104 <0.000010> write(2, "[95%] deleting '/gnu/store/p6r2jjy6frp682z3x94nvnmdh71p1p58-ecl-q= uicksearch-0.01"..., 99) =3D 99 <0.000019> read(27, "gmlo\0\0\0\0", 8) =3D 8 <0.017863> read(27, "^\0\0\0\0\0\0\0", 8) =3D 8 <0.000019> read(27, "[95%] deleting '/gnu/store/v6zd510kfmqd8j4w7q3zy9bid1fj96dk-sheph= erd-guix-daemon"..., 96) =3D 96 <0.000007> write(2, "[95%] deleting '/gnu/store/v6zd510kfmqd8j4w7q3zy9bid1fj96dk-sheph= erd-guix-daemon"..., 94) =3D 94 <0.000012> read(27, "gmlo\0\0\0\0", 8) =3D 8 <5.861071> read(27, "T\0\0\0\0\0\0\0", 8) =3D 8 <0.000061> read(27, "[95%] deleting '/gnu/store/0hpwig8cwdnzygjjzs9zjbxicvhif2vv-rust-= bitvec-0.19.4.d"..., 88) =3D 88 <0.000087> write(2, "[95%] deleting '/gnu/store/0hpwig8cwdnzygjjzs9zjbxicvhif2vv-rust-= bitvec-0.19.4.d"..., 84) =3D 84 <0.000033> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- (Notice =E2=80=98read=E2=80=99 taking 5.9s above.) Ludo=E2=80=99. From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: GC takes more than 9 hours on berlin Resent-From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2021 11:24:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Christopher Baines Cc: Mathieu Othacehe , 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.163801219024941 (code B ref 51787); Sat, 27 Nov 2021 11:24:02 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Nov 2021 11:23:10 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33059 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mqvnR-0006UC-Rp for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 27 Nov 2021 06:23:10 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:56470) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mqvnQ-0006Tz-MK for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 27 Nov 2021 06:23:09 -0500 Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=55412 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mqvnL-0005Pf-Fb; Sat, 27 Nov 2021 06:23:03 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:To: From; bh=5mvaxKCQSiBJX83BU6inKQlM7LkweTWP5L8gOQnMwCc=; b=MmD2mC3il8BhgZq6hOf2 EtCKcl/6d7HcbF3XlMV4Ui9ZJDC9GyTyGLyHDROfTGZL373f5XrxfUodJjMAC0Goxm1LQEfXnhQFJ lh1X2UY3v+poPMNPlGnxKfvQRxIZk0ZUDyoP7pbxj80/s+eKV0ig01FcJXAmY3nGs9FBP8pvweCkA HBs3a9LSU/i+yDHHEUEi8HtZsI9203VznVcrTIf9kQKIuIVaVGSeRIaXStbi9Dptq2W6gCd80+ABt s6cMXd0KPHIlvZb/YJA7kYWibgQPMuUeDbIMzwaNjUl3IaskGbeUqvDjJ98rBDsK+aMsdjljOGB3P CG2BbbVuZqSVVQ==; Received: from 91-160-117-201.subs.proxad.net ([91.160.117.201]:49494 helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mqvnL-0003e9-5F; Sat, 27 Nov 2021 06:23:03 -0500 From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= References: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> <87zgpuhig7.fsf@gnu.org> <87wnkv15k3.fsf@cbaines.net> Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2021 12:23:00 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87wnkv15k3.fsf@cbaines.net> (Christopher Baines's message of "Thu, 25 Nov 2021 13:24:17 +0000") Message-ID: <87zgpp971n.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hi Chris, Christopher Baines skribis: > So, as I understand it, the WAL is made up of pages, and checking for > this db, I think they're the current default size of 4096 bytes. > > sqlite> PRAGMA page_size; > 4096 > > From looking at the code, the wal_autocheckpoint value is set to 40000: > > /* Increase the auto-checkpoint interval to 40000 pages. This > seems enough to ensure that instantiating the NixOS system > derivation is done in a single fsync(). */ > if (mode =3D=3D "wal" && sqlite3_exec(db, "pragma wal_autocheckpoint = =3D 40000;", 0, 0, 0) !=3D SQLITE_OK) > throwSQLiteError(db, "setting autocheckpoint interval"); > > https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/tree/nix/libstore/local-store.= cc#n253 > > This means you'd expect the WAL to be in the region of 40000*4096 bytes, > or ~160MB. Assuming the autocheckpointing is keeping up... it doesn't > look to be, since the file is now much larger than this. > > As described here [1], the automatic checkpoints are PASSIVE ones, which > has the advantage of not interrupting any readers or writers, but can > also do nothing if it's being blocked by readers or writers. > > 1: https://www.sqlite.org/wal.html#application_initiated_checkpoints > > What I've found while writing the Guix Build Coordinator, is that when > the service is busy (usually new builds being submitted, plus lots of > builds happening), the PASSIVE checkpoints aren't sufficient. To > supplement them, there's a regular check that looks at the size of the > WAL file, and runs a TRUNCATE checkpoint, which is a FULL checkpoint > (which blocks new writers), plus truncating the WAL file once it's > finished checkpointing the entire WAL. The truncating is mostly so that > it's easier to monitor the size of the WAL, by checking the size of the > file. OK. That may well be what happens on berlin these days: the database is kept busy all day long, so presumably checkpoints don=E2=80=99t happen and = the WAL file grows. > I feel like I need to defend SQLite at this point. Tuning the > configuration of a database to get acceptable performance is the norm, I > had to tune the PostgreSQL configuration for data.guix.gnu.org to > improve the performance. It's easier to get in to trouble with SQLite > because it's a lower level too, and requires you to actually initiate > things like checkpoints or periodic optimisation if you want them to > happen. Understood. It=E2=80=99s really not about defending software X against Y, = but rather about finding ways to address the issues we experience. >> =E2=80=A2 =E2=80=98db.sqlite=E2=80=99 weighs in at 19=C2=A0GiB (!) so = perhaps there=E2=80=99s something to >> do, like the =E2=80=9CVACUUM=E2=80=9D thing maybe. Chris? > > Doing a VACCUM might address some fragmentation and improve performance, > it's probably worth trying. Alright, let=E2=80=99s give it a try. >> =E2=80=A2 Stracing the session=E2=80=99s guix-daemon process during GC= suggests that >> most of the time goes into I/O from =E2=80=98db.sqlite=E2=80=99. It= =E2=80=99s not >> surprising because that GC phase is basically about browsing the >> database, but it does seem to take a little too long for each store >> item. > > At least the way I've approached finding and fixing the poor performance > issues in the Guix Build Coordinator is through adding instrumentation, > so just recording the time that calling particular procedures takes, and > then logging if it's longer than some threshold. Yeah, that makes sense. I think we always took these bits of the daemon for granted because they=E2=80=99d been used on large stores even before Gu= ix existed. > Since this issue is about Cuirass, there's also the possibility of > avoiding the problems of a large store, by avoiding having a large > store. That's what bordeaux.guix.gnu.org does, and I thought it was part > of the plan for ci.guix.gnu.org (at least around a year ago)? That=E2=80=99s indeed the case: the store is smaller than it used to be (but still 27=C2=A0TiB), it=E2=80=99s GC=E2=80=99d more aggressively than before= , and instead we rely on /var/cache/guix/publish for long-term storage. Perhaps we should go further and keep the store smaller though. Thanks for your feedback! Ludo=E2=80=99. From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: GC takes more than 9 hours on berlin Resent-From: Mathieu Othacehe Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2021 09:47:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: Christopher Baines , 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.163852476925995 (code B ref 51787); Fri, 03 Dec 2021 09:47:02 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Dec 2021 09:46:09 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50044 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mt58p-0006lC-VY for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 03 Dec 2021 04:46:09 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:37814) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mt58k-0006kP-Hf for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 03 Dec 2021 04:46:06 -0500 Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=52632 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mt58f-0006yX-8P; Fri, 03 Dec 2021 04:45:57 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:To: From; bh=xmwmbW9vXVr/ZtwjcCAoYK4+ewUBpIpM+LgIa8ApClg=; b=aMxx0sylfmKaraIDabWH Kp53oKd8T1sBKu1watkFVwPWYypqjtEalhTTYJgmltFGdSvNOK5ZDFH3u4a0dM+RpA0IdHZJtJy+b uXBSxAaIHmPCCcNbMDwOxetoosaejoRWGuhu76HoLpeqLL/xXA+TtwhfRonDdfuL70UCPaEOM6WJI tOZ2+8sQwuNGwqjBUU0mW8Yyctf5cYM7ZJmZqDQjegbOM7EUGqXc/OLztcwwJmYk4fRTn+WnSOrml gT0ATTkE2CK0x/i1u+hELbE1D9VAiiYmMOkMwWbDNVIhez8Ts8BxbUO/8LeFmgNYDmwhCSvY0p+LJ RvLNrwp7KtQCiw==; Received: from [2a01:e0a:19b:d9a0:45b5:a14a:5c75:5737] (port=32910 helo=meije) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mt58e-0003JZ-8W; Fri, 03 Dec 2021 04:45:57 -0500 From: Mathieu Othacehe References: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> <87zgpuhig7.fsf@gnu.org> <87wnkv15k3.fsf@cbaines.net> <87zgpp971n.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2021 10:45:54 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87zgpp971n.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?="'s message of "Sat, 27 Nov 2021 12:23:00 +0100") Message-ID: <87pmqet419.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hello, > That=E2=80=99s indeed the case: the store is smaller than it used to be (= but > still 27=C2=A0TiB), it=E2=80=99s GC=E2=80=99d more aggressively than befo= re, and instead we > rely on /var/cache/guix/publish for long-term storage. > > Perhaps we should go further and keep the store smaller though. That's what I did with 93adf7aaa693d234ee13240e9f4ff22a2dfef599 on maintenance. It increases the GC threshold to 15TiB. Let's see if it brings some improvements. Thanks, Mathieu From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: GC takes more than 9 hours on berlin Resent-From: Mathieu Othacehe Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 06:25:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.16391174666736 (code B ref 51787); Fri, 10 Dec 2021 06:25:02 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Dec 2021 06:24:26 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45305 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mvZKT-0001kZ-LS for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 01:24:25 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:35826) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mvZKR-0001kM-9z for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 01:24:24 -0500 Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=43114 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mvZKL-0005h1-Ta; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 01:24:17 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:To: From; bh=sqmiVqIAwj+IyqMPVIM7phDU/I4q3A1Acdo4zXzSmGo=; b=FLBy/2tkBklCPKlOBVbt dTGTdjLT19OcAJkVJltH8KnFH0PQr1aoYzaxf7fCcBUSnMVlJwL2cewJuxy80wc85E51l+kOUxsf5 0LwjPmQJNVdsK2D3Z8vKiYX+SgxuSztSFfXSlVjmDrhar5ucZBrdBB9CFzQplS54Mjv7C65MdUj3V 4As4Z4BJ6+HINU8r6w5sjbHlUv4hhCSMNd8eFFF/23RGelTjM2WDm5jYDcr61npemGiscMjDSeNvS 52NTpV1kSfHc0nSgnArYWhI5kxXCy8MynbxJtsPfIKtwuUiR6P1VSxizrunHAGjGfxCjx1PY26SEI Myc+yEn3reRQvQ==; Received: from [2a01:e0a:19b:d9a0:2ddb:d3d2:32e8:d31a] (port=33052 helo=meije) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mvZKL-0001xQ-R3; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 01:24:18 -0500 From: Mathieu Othacehe References: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> <87zgpuhig7.fsf@gnu.org> <87wnkv15k3.fsf@cbaines.net> <87zgpp971n.fsf@gnu.org> <87pmqet419.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 07:24:15 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87pmqet419.fsf@gnu.org> (Mathieu Othacehe's message of "Fri, 03 Dec 2021 10:45:54 +0100") Message-ID: <87czm57zao.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hey, New GC recap. The process that has been started yesterday at 04:00 is still running. I killed the GC that was started today at 04:00 to keep things clear. >From yesterday 11:00 when I started monitoring it to today when I'm writing this email, 20 hours have elapsed and the GC is still in the same phase: removing recursively the /gnu/store/trash directory content. It corresponds to the following snippet for those of you who would like to have a look to the corresponding code: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- if (state.shouldDelete) { if (pathExists(state.trashDir)) deleteGarbage(state, state.trashDir); // > 20 hours try { createDirs(state.trashDir); } catch (SysError & e) { if (e.errNo == ENOSPC) { printMsg(lvlInfo, format("note: can't create trash directory: %1%") % e.msg()); state.moveToTrash = false; } } }--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- This is an early phase of the garbage collecting, where store items that were moved to the trash directory by previous GC runs are effectively removed. Stracing the guix-daemon process associated with the GC process clearly shows what's going on: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- chmod("/gnu/store/trash/272ibwb38i0kcbcl3n9v0ka1rsmd1104-guix-web-site/de/packages/rust-syntex-0.58.1", 040755) = 0 <0.000012> openat(AT_FDCWD, "/gnu/store/trash/272ibwb38i0kcbcl3n9v0ka1rsmd1104-guix-web-site/de/packages/rust-syntex-0.58.1", O_RDONLY|O_NONBLOCK|O_CLOEXEC|O_DIRECTORY) = 13 <0.000011> fstat(13, {st_mode=S_IFDIR|0755, st_size=4096, ...}) = 0 <0.000007> getdents64(13, 0x397a510 /* 3 entries */, 32768) = 80 <0.005059> getdents64(13, 0x397a510 /* 0 entries */, 32768) = 0 <0.000007> close(13) = 0 <0.000008> statx(AT_FDCWD, "/gnu/store/trash/272ibwb38i0kcbcl3n9v0ka1rsmd1104-guix-web-site/de/packages/rust-syntex-0.58.1/index.html", AT_STATX_SYNC_AS_STAT|AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW, STATX_MODE|STATX_NLINK|STATX_SIZE, {stx_mask=STATX_BASIC_STATS|0x1000, stx_attributes=0, stx_mode=S_IFREG|0444, stx_size=10265, ...}) = 0 <0.000023> unlink("/gnu/store/trash/272ibwb38i0kcbcl3n9v0ka1rsmd1104-guix-web-site/de/packages/rust-syntex-0.58.1/index.html") = 0 <0.000013> rmdir("/gnu/store/trash/272ibwb38i0kcbcl3n9v0ka1rsmd1104-guix-web-site/de/packages/rust-syntex-0.58.1") = 0 <0.000028> statx(AT_FDCWD, "/gnu/store/trash/272ibwb38i0kcbcl3n9v0ka1rsmd1104-guix-web-site/de/packages/lofreq-2.1.5", AT_STATX_ --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- Several syscalls are involved to clean the trash directory: chmod, openat, statx, unlink and rmdir. This does not seem particularly wrong. What is problematic though is that in 20 hours, the free space has bumped from 9.6T to 9.7T in the store partition. As the GC lock is preventing most of Berlin services from running, almost all the machine IO is dedicated to removing this directory, as shown by iotop. I'm not sure to understand why this removing process is so long, but if someone has an idea, I'm all ears. In the meantime, I plan to let the GC run and keep monitoring it. Thanks, Mathieu From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: GC takes more than 9 hours on berlin Resent-From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 10:23:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Mathieu Othacehe Cc: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.163913173031903 (code B ref 51787); Fri, 10 Dec 2021 10:23:01 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Dec 2021 10:22:10 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45586 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mvd2Y-0008IV-Gh for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 05:22:10 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:51934) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mvd2U-0008IF-Ob for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 05:22:09 -0500 Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=51218 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mvd2P-00035U-I0 for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 05:22:01 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:To: From; bh=UZ3yiU183nsbMZaRxe9oH4t9kFvV2IAIZ7Nq5ZVFaL8=; b=a6++0wwYD43rCLU+NuUU r31nSPIQezPisvDT/zHJK1D07lZ2mOOKjG8NFF8jOcV7cF9aLmsonICJwwP+NTEA/iL3G1yfkCaEH w+btjGT2sAOKqmkVZyCvtqDqXfTnYRI6ZjHOpkiOBP4Z6n+v1BeaZyL4LymH2BwcwtfIhQaPha7+f 38Vawd3jAXBIZZt4yc6aeKUSQuvSteyx9gvEtBXu24YgssXqzmcCAllqul11HCsgdao7LTvtSLrVb CIDI3U72X2a+DmcgOtdF2dCOlt6hok1WnWxnvVwwbq9lh0BvLX06UdZ6D6/9M2joOBt3EUVKVj6pv C8ND7Gb/gGgmAA==; Received: from 91-160-117-201.subs.proxad.net ([91.160.117.201]:60560 helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mvd2P-0003dT-B4; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 05:22:01 -0500 From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= References: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> <87zgpuhig7.fsf@gnu.org> <87wnkv15k3.fsf@cbaines.net> <87zgpp971n.fsf@gnu.org> <87pmqet419.fsf@gnu.org> <87czm57zao.fsf@gnu.org> X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 20 Frimaire an 230 de la =?UTF-8?Q?R=C3=A9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0x090B11993D9AEBB5 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3CE4 6455 8A84 FDC6 9DB4 0CFB 090B 1199 3D9A EBB5 X-OS: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 11:21:58 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87czm57zao.fsf@gnu.org> (Mathieu Othacehe's message of "Fri, 10 Dec 2021 07:24:15 +0100") Message-ID: <87czm4bvzt.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hi, Mathieu Othacehe skribis: > What is problematic though is that in 20 hours, the free space has > bumped from 9.6T to 9.7T in the store partition. As the GC lock is > preventing most of Berlin services from running, almost all the machine > IO is dedicated to removing this directory, as shown by iotop. > > I'm not sure to understand why this removing process is so long, but if > someone has an idea, I'm all ears. In the meantime, I plan to let the GC > run and keep monitoring it. This is the first time GC runs since we=E2=80=99ve increased the threshold = from 10=C2=A0TiB to 15=C2=A0TiB free. There are at least 5 more TiBs to delete = than usual, so it=E2=80=99s expected to take more time. Still, I=E2=80=99m surprised a mere =E2=80=98rm -rf=E2=80=99 can take this = long. =E2=80=98strace -T=E2=80=99 on the child guix-daemon process doesn=E2=80=99t reveal anything obviously wro= ng, pause times or similar. Ludo=E2=80=99. From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: GC takes more than 9 hours on berlin Resent-From: Mathieu Othacehe Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 17:12:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.163915629923203 (code B ref 51787); Fri, 10 Dec 2021 17:12:02 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Dec 2021 17:11:39 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47818 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mvjQp-000627-10 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 12:11:39 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:41166) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mvjQn-00061s-54 for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 12:11:38 -0500 Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=36092 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mvjQh-0000fe-OT; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 12:11:31 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:To: From; bh=9IkbFlV8mwax15N9cFcQRANKiSxTrz6R5ceiE2+33ao=; b=rn1rrLGx1Ug5myi24omF 4yeEOlMS+ukzBMfcd1elW/8fkaCxpcDIqr+6oekr3OuHmzG2kUGpDqyM4umcQoTSAdqLyCcd2uTVu iA/fVIx2eiebSZ/A78EPupMa22+z8aKXxiR3xRwmU4/zfOwXfshmrgAr1KZIbJWWnMFKLyEtqnWd3 YYKjOAg59Qtp4Bc3zcWEwaZKwgV6kBvaVCiXwuS38+b6xq8mDJREa0+/2r+feE5H9YYdarHqJcOgj ErGbeWJPCb5ngpkO147rddGZCHPeZMmvWuMl6vQkpbzB8k86+k8C8ufXaPqrtBY9f4Khmm/QiniBi uN8+tYOQmv3YTQ==; Received: from [2a01:e0a:19b:d9a0:45b5:a14a:5c75:5737] (port=53954 helo=meije) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mvjQh-000857-Gn; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 12:11:31 -0500 From: Mathieu Othacehe References: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> <87zgpuhig7.fsf@gnu.org> <87wnkv15k3.fsf@cbaines.net> <87zgpp971n.fsf@gnu.org> <87pmqet419.fsf@gnu.org> <87czm57zao.fsf@gnu.org> <87czm4bvzt.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 18:11:29 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87czm4bvzt.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?="'s message of "Fri, 10 Dec 2021 11:21:58 +0100") Message-ID: <877dcccrlq.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hey, > Still, I=E2=80=99m surprised a mere =E2=80=98rm -rf=E2=80=99 can take thi= s long. =E2=80=98strace -T=E2=80=99 on > the child guix-daemon process doesn=E2=80=99t reveal anything obviously w= rong, > pause times or similar. I noticed that the process isn't around anymore. Did anyone killed it, or maybe it just crashed? Also noticed some trash removing commands were running. Regardless of the root cause of the problem, getting rid of the trash directory before the next evaluation seems like a good idea. Thanks, Mathieu From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: GC takes more than 9 hours on berlin Resent-From: Mathieu Othacehe Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 17:12:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.163915630623222 (code B ref 51787); Fri, 10 Dec 2021 17:12:02 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Dec 2021 17:11:46 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47822 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mvjQw-00062U-8P for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 12:11:46 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:41198) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mvjQt-000626-Ku for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 12:11:44 -0500 Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=36100 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mvjQk-0000vS-T5; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 12:11:38 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To: From; bh=9IkbFlV8mwax15N9cFcQRANKiSxTrz6R5ceiE2+33ao=; b=kD28yrLbWr5GDz9OUcTx 1mn8y/akBuV6bbpQ+hLv68ryZp927R5a9nx5WdQ8ALNOsNaVHsTQ1YLFTjkWn8auk+Xy5pvi98CE8 ImGByIFrYatN7g4rCmTYGAK2D5FcKPPIBhw+Oz8DJI9x8EmAC1fm1WjzRSOxxjDQUu0PO9t8bZ5O0 UVSHllhQj7pKLYKhECrJTXAAdVeCLLX7ElSoH3P3FKmjXV5dCB7NIuDW8rJVw2FzY8eskhZXtnUGg dSrnvexFCPaWRafoS8mpvbfeFvIkPqiwnoMhjGTBgrWMEA6CUFoeLcu5WrsH/fUUD9QBNAQzruhku vCIvvNRlILSn2A==; Received: from [2a01:e0a:19b:d9a0:45b5:a14a:5c75:5737] (port=53956 helo=meije) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mvjQk-00086L-QY; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 12:11:35 -0500 From: Mathieu Othacehe In-Reply-To: <87czm4bvzt.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?="'s message of "Fri, 10 Dec 2021 11:21:58 +0100") References: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> <87zgpuhig7.fsf@gnu.org> <87wnkv15k3.fsf@cbaines.net> <87zgpp971n.fsf@gnu.org> <87pmqet419.fsf@gnu.org> <87czm57zao.fsf@gnu.org> <87czm4bvzt.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 18:11:32 +0100 Message-ID: <875yrwcrln.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hey, > Still, I=E2=80=99m surprised a mere =E2=80=98rm -rf=E2=80=99 can take thi= s long. =E2=80=98strace -T=E2=80=99 on > the child guix-daemon process doesn=E2=80=99t reveal anything obviously w= rong, > pause times or similar. I noticed that the process isn't around anymore. Did anyone killed it, or maybe it just crashed? Also noticed some trash removing commands were running. Regardless of the root cause of the problem, getting rid of the trash directory before the next evaluation seems like a good idea. Thanks, Mathieu From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: GC takes more than 9 hours on berlin References: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> Resent-From: Ricardo Wurmus Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 19:39:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.16391651366201 (code B ref 51787); Fri, 10 Dec 2021 19:39:01 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Dec 2021 19:38:56 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47936 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mvljM-0001bw-21 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:38:56 -0500 Received: from sender3-of-o51.zoho.com ([136.143.184.51]:21785) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mvljG-0001bk-Ex for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:38:54 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1639165127; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=Wi4lW8kBo6baRo6Zqeh48dfjQpPB3q7deffYdEywffgVnTtfKwGsNgE+gbzLvzOe7yFftGh8IcGbCf8m63pqeI/XG1PYwlxU64wtvEB5EUsUgbV9WK+dQfOitgydJUnTGx1/MxnttBRoii/5nVSlTsM5TOSWYayLJ9qVIHGEyxg= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1639165127; h=Content-Type:Date:From:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Subject:To; bh=RX/BQH64PFJE4vOlQxDpH2fza9YjrrVBGZ8oc8f9/CI=; b=X+nSEJJYyszXyPjLMB/WcDOSzanDQwuuE+wumOzlw8vgEXvv9lK0uz0ate/VsYDvMgKsZzqhdQVFFT9jMf8fhIh4Rc4Jg9A9THgRsTwO4e2vv0mrdftkQVMWasiu2VEvoFMfb2DSnRuS3jaaSKVJrkHiPs4c/bE5YVHcNuT+UHk= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; dkim=pass header.i=elephly.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=rekado@elephly.net; dmarc=pass header.from= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1639165127; s=zoho; d=elephly.net; i=rekado@elephly.net; h=From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type; bh=RX/BQH64PFJE4vOlQxDpH2fza9YjrrVBGZ8oc8f9/CI=; b=RAbMMHRX96gy3StJR7wJgz0zQ6xSlRBq/NECIjW3CMvbSUOKdzaL/pYzrDIP1vQ0 RM9wWrw1tb8guh7lYszW/0KkZElalOhsB3/uM+0MP4AW8ocAWPTgK+KNsmiM4YxeJ5O 2x/dV7aDL84E/4cI01UT6Hp9rzb6CL/8a7E+gN2E= Received: from localhost (p54ad4e72.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.173.78.114]) by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1639165122215259.0267296351809; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 11:38:42 -0800 (PST) User-agent: mu4e 1.6.6; emacs 27.2 From: Ricardo Wurmus Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 19:38:11 +0000 X-URL: https://elephly.net X-PGP-Key: https://elephly.net/rekado.pubkey X-PGP-Fingerprint: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6 2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC Message-ID: <8735n0s11d.fsf@elephly.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-ZohoMailClient: External X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) > I noticed that the process isn't around anymore. Did anyone killed > it,or maybe it just crashed? I have not touched it. -- Ricardo From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: GC takes more than 9 hours on berlin Resent-From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 21:56:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Mathieu Othacehe Cc: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.163917330118923 (code B ref 51787); Fri, 10 Dec 2021 21:56:01 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Dec 2021 21:55:01 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48062 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mvnr3-0004v5-Bw for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 16:55:01 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:49242) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mvnr2-0004uk-4D for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 16:55:00 -0500 Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=50382 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mvnqw-00029d-RJ for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 16:54:54 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:To: From; bh=666QD3BrVVkj+diIOR1o7PctKtjSesXLghNLsDRB0+s=; b=DLBEXl7nzWOfryF81HKp 6tvQuySdMrFuTpu9vkAhMLVGlRbBQgBftx8dufMqJUZ0OXGMN94F12BEVFftTzc32+N97dRWaIUM9 jXd2eUDtUE9G1oaOi9R5JMA6uATq7zXasVHiVcdpxCClznlY4nDPrM6ztVqyuLoY3BiKCOAhUmp7u eJLt61yyB7JFHFe7P0CpTLlfqa0PSDzTxoB4BjjVnCIT4HWnqn3p82JWwIQjfyIjIZqxKsHijtQGL VMH2Y0rg4lGoIS3P/U5DgO7UWrdU00S88TBcHjaqpyJr1X3uedohIvquCStrc2yT9XQqGLEwya6Tt GkLjo1bgOzTLzw==; Received: from 91-160-117-201.subs.proxad.net ([91.160.117.201]:63117 helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mvnqw-0001yX-FA; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 16:54:54 -0500 From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= References: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> <87zgpuhig7.fsf@gnu.org> <87wnkv15k3.fsf@cbaines.net> <87zgpp971n.fsf@gnu.org> <87pmqet419.fsf@gnu.org> <87czm57zao.fsf@gnu.org> <87czm4bvzt.fsf@gnu.org> <877dcccrlq.fsf@gnu.org> X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 20 Frimaire an 230 de la =?UTF-8?Q?R=C3=A9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0x090B11993D9AEBB5 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3CE4 6455 8A84 FDC6 9DB4 0CFB 090B 1199 3D9A EBB5 X-OS: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 22:54:51 +0100 In-Reply-To: <877dcccrlq.fsf@gnu.org> (Mathieu Othacehe's message of "Fri, 10 Dec 2021 18:11:29 +0100") Message-ID: <87a6h86s7o.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Mathieu Othacehe skribis: >> Still, I=E2=80=99m surprised a mere =E2=80=98rm -rf=E2=80=99 can take th= is long. =E2=80=98strace -T=E2=80=99 on >> the child guix-daemon process doesn=E2=80=99t reveal anything obviously = wrong, >> pause times or similar. > > I noticed that the process isn't around anymore. Did anyone killed it, > or maybe it just crashed? Also noticed some trash removing commands were > running. Regardless of the root cause of the problem, getting rid of the > trash directory before the next evaluation seems like a good idea. Yeah I don=E2=80=99t know what happened to the GC process but it disappeared earlier today. Then I started things like this: unshare -m sh -c 'mount --bind -o remount,rw /gnu/store; rm -rf --one-fil= e-system /gnu/store/trash/[abc]*' which is equally slow (perhaps slightly slower: it seems to do more syscalls per file to remove than the guix-daemon code). Anyway, I=E2=80=99ll let it run hoping it=E2=80=99ll be done by the next GC. Ludo=E2=80=99. From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: GC takes more than 9 hours on berlin Resent-From: Mathieu Othacehe Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2021 09:43:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.163921575922005 (code B ref 51787); Sat, 11 Dec 2021 09:43:02 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Dec 2021 09:42:39 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48552 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mvytq-0005ir-VP for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 11 Dec 2021 04:42:39 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:55402) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mvytp-0005ie-1q for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 11 Dec 2021 04:42:37 -0500 Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=54242 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mvytj-00071m-Py; Sat, 11 Dec 2021 04:42:31 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:To: From; bh=LqKATR/Ne6Ec6COKq/S3LC1bNc+M/07AM+bhyC8XLxE=; b=i4cKFok48eFCyInyqHHd zlD/KIHVWJlqsAWN1AWtJtmgGAALZvEwnxEAAq2S+Wz+x03VXmmjJMcYEDBS9U7do4ifq+jn/T7b+ ykYTWcf609VNAFMr6XlfhTr7joi6wx7emP8FKoFvmcGJP6/m07a5zAQPZG2wiVYfyzklLpr/UA3Pn +WjARzHQhkWXKk3uPbCet26GWukk2bnxmxqyol9gZBK0GqO1rZyuXns6p5uhS58nGq9g9MmV8Qj7X cn76xvf9SA1jnu1//PCZvTtOgLOB50/iG19yoCqCaXhEYg2iMNXbQ8tiF1ZeerVi8FrjmMXuED8c2 JgE6eLkqHITI6g==; Received: from [2a01:e0a:19b:d9a0:2ddb:d3d2:32e8:d31a] (port=33136 helo=meije) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mvytj-0002S3-Kg; Sat, 11 Dec 2021 04:42:31 -0500 From: Mathieu Othacehe References: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> <87zgpuhig7.fsf@gnu.org> <87wnkv15k3.fsf@cbaines.net> <87zgpp971n.fsf@gnu.org> <87pmqet419.fsf@gnu.org> <87czm57zao.fsf@gnu.org> <87czm4bvzt.fsf@gnu.org> <877dcccrlq.fsf@gnu.org> <87a6h86s7o.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2021 10:42:30 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87a6h86s7o.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?="'s message of "Fri, 10 Dec 2021 22:54:51 +0100") Message-ID: <87bl1nxyt5.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hey, > Yeah I don=E2=80=99t know what happened to the GC process but it disappea= red > earlier today. Then I started things like this: > > unshare -m sh -c 'mount --bind -o remount,rw /gnu/store; rm -rf --one-f= ile-system /gnu/store/trash/[abc]*' > > which is equally slow (perhaps slightly slower: it seems to do more > syscalls per file to remove than the guix-daemon code). > > Anyway, I=E2=80=99ll let it run hoping it=E2=80=99ll be done by the next = GC. OK, thanks. Looks it just finished removing the trash directory content. I started a GC process from my session to monitor it closely. Mathieu From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: GC takes more than 9 hours on berlin Resent-From: Mathieu Othacehe Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2021 17:10:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.16393289926642 (code B ref 51787); Sun, 12 Dec 2021 17:10:01 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Dec 2021 17:09:52 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53012 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mwSMB-0001j4-SF for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 12 Dec 2021 12:09:52 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:41766) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mwSM9-0001ir-Vg for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 12 Dec 2021 12:09:50 -0500 Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=35650 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mwSM4-0002fl-QZ for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 12 Dec 2021 12:09:44 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:To: From; bh=q1IqzqZRjMyy8SGAcWVTq6J9mYkAHEDd3IDNK/2jRjk=; b=GDwFPaIk/oIPlwBlNcO8 7PLNJ9gWKBo6HemDuLU8JisJqm8+/+yZFt8j/8I0xby61NnknQ5/MaPBDL+zgS+9Be6j9Wa7m8dX9 +zp/nh64vNNuue3nmBYVaB6sWdijMWku1rlELItZrpN+j6BqApSn1XpIhOcvOCRx8S7ufubQxXIn0 p30aehLKCn9a8pBuhuDmGOp5li1Ja2Ajq1K5GQ0iLZJ713SplAkq69w34Mz8oodamghqEjbq9ybRe dqfkDE6gCNAIT/d4XU2ftwnHM4bBjk311ceTPkeQpOBAXDGzb8Avm0MVNcb3qFR11e4JwwRE1UB94 JlIKj2wPgJc3Lw==; Received: from [2a01:e0a:19b:d9a0:45b5:a14a:5c75:5737] (port=53994 helo=meije) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mwSM4-00008D-NM for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 12 Dec 2021 12:09:44 -0500 From: Mathieu Othacehe References: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> <87zgpuhig7.fsf@gnu.org> <87wnkv15k3.fsf@cbaines.net> <87zgpp971n.fsf@gnu.org> <87pmqet419.fsf@gnu.org> <87czm57zao.fsf@gnu.org> <87czm4bvzt.fsf@gnu.org> <877dcccrlq.fsf@gnu.org> <87a6h86s7o.fsf@gnu.org> <87bl1nxyt5.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2021 18:09:42 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87bl1nxyt5.fsf@gnu.org> (Mathieu Othacehe's message of "Sat, 11 Dec 2021 10:42:30 +0100") Message-ID: <87o85lhhrd.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hey, > OK, thanks. Looks it just finished removing the trash directory > content. I started a GC process from my session to monitor it closely. Daily GC recap: * The GC process I started yesterday, did collect 5.5TiB in approximately 24 hours, that are now in the /gnu/store/trash directory. * The /gnu/store/trash directory contains 288910 entries. If those items are removed at the same rate than on the previous days, it will take days/months to delete them all. * I noticed that the upstream Nix GC process can now operate without locking. I think it shouldn't be too hard to port it to our fork or maybe rewrite the process in Guile while we are at it. That will not fix the slow hard-drives issues though. Thanks, Mathieu From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: GC takes more than 9 hours on berlin Resent-From: Christian =?UTF-8?Q?Th=C3=A4ter?= Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2021 16:16:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org X-Debbugs-Original-To: bug-guix@gnu.org Received: via spool by submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B.163941214824597 (code B ref -1); Mon, 13 Dec 2021 16:16:01 +0000 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 Dec 2021 16:15:48 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56625 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mwnzP-0006Of-Oy for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 11:15:47 -0500 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:38810) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mwnxR-0006Kr-35 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 11:13:48 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:44248) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mwnxQ-0003ZB-Uv for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 11:13:44 -0500 Received: from mail.pipapo.org ([78.47.240.153]:59240) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mwnxO-0007cn-IL for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 11:13:44 -0500 Received: from hermes.pipapo.org (imap.pipapo.org [10.10.40.10]) by mail.pipapo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D7945E45F for ; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 16:13:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from wolke.pipapo.org (wolke.pipapo.org [10.100.20.10]) by hermes.pipapo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0FD199E02EAA for ; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 16:13:42 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2021 17:13:33 +0100 From: Christian =?UTF-8?Q?Th=C3=A4ter?= Message-ID: <20211213171333.04105a3b@wolke.pipapo.org> In-Reply-To: <87o85lhhrd.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> <87zgpuhig7.fsf@gnu.org> <87wnkv15k3.fsf@cbaines.net> <87zgpp971n.fsf@gnu.org> <87pmqet419.fsf@gnu.org> <87czm57zao.fsf@gnu.org> <87czm4bvzt.fsf@gnu.org> <877dcccrlq.fsf@gnu.org> <87a6h86s7o.fsf@gnu.org> <87bl1nxyt5.fsf@gnu.org> <87o85lhhrd.fsf@gnu.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.8 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received-SPF: none client-ip=78.47.240.153; envelope-from=ct.guix@pipapo.org; helo=mail.pipapo.org X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 13 Dec 2021 11:15:47 -0500 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) On 2021-12-12 18:09, Mathieu Othacehe wrote: >Hey, > >> OK, thanks. Looks it just finished removing the trash directory >> content. I started a GC process from my session to monitor it >> closely. > >Daily GC recap: > >* The GC process I started yesterday, did collect 5.5TiB in > approximately 24 hours, that are now in the /gnu/store/trash > directory. > >* The /gnu/store/trash directory contains 288910 entries. If those >items > are removed at the same rate than on the previous days, it will take > days/months to delete them all. > >* I noticed that the upstream Nix GC process can now operate without > locking. I think it shouldn't be too hard to port it to our fork or > maybe rewrite the process in Guile while we are at it. > > That will not fix the slow hard-drives issues though. While discussing this issue on IRC I came up with some idea: 'rmrfd' a system daemon that deletes huge trees in the background where '-rf' stands for --really --fast :) Actually this is an use case that happens for on my backup system too. With that idea I just started coding and ran some experiments. For me this looks quite feasible now and I will continue next days on this small project. Any feedback or help would be welcomed! The initial ideas and experiments are at https://github.com/cehteh/rmrfd Note that the important part is that it will put some efforts into freeing as much space as possible at begin of the freeing process, Unlike just 'rm -rf' where space may only freed really late when the last link count of the data goes to zero. Cheers Christian From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: GC takes more than 9 hours on berlin Resent-From: Christian =?UTF-8?Q?Th=C3=A4ter?= Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2021 03:32:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org X-Debbugs-Original-To: bug-guix@gnu.org Received: via spool by submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B.16394526987773 (code B ref -1); Tue, 14 Dec 2021 03:32:02 +0000 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 14 Dec 2021 03:31:38 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57288 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mwyXS-00021I-Gt for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 22:31:38 -0500 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:52670) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mwyXO-000217-Iw for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 22:31:37 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:47354) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mwyXM-0004Q7-4k for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 22:31:33 -0500 Received: from mail.pipapo.org ([78.47.240.153]:59736) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mwyXJ-0002ct-5k for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 22:31:31 -0500 Received: from hermes.pipapo.org (imap.pipapo.org [10.10.40.10]) by mail.pipapo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0D7A75E7EB for ; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 03:31:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from wolke.pipapo.org (wolke.pipapo.org [10.100.20.10]) by hermes.pipapo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 099D09E01211 for ; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 03:31:30 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2021 04:31:23 +0100 From: Christian =?UTF-8?Q?Th=C3=A4ter?= Message-ID: <20211214043123.7b041b8a@wolke.pipapo.org> In-Reply-To: <87o85lhhrd.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> <87zgpuhig7.fsf@gnu.org> <87wnkv15k3.fsf@cbaines.net> <87zgpp971n.fsf@gnu.org> <87pmqet419.fsf@gnu.org> <87czm57zao.fsf@gnu.org> <87czm4bvzt.fsf@gnu.org> <877dcccrlq.fsf@gnu.org> <87a6h86s7o.fsf@gnu.org> <87bl1nxyt5.fsf@gnu.org> <87o85lhhrd.fsf@gnu.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.8 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received-SPF: none client-ip=78.47.240.153; envelope-from=ct@pipapo.org; helo=mail.pipapo.org X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) On 2021-12-12 18:09, Mathieu Othacehe wrote: >Hey, > >> OK, thanks. Looks it just finished removing the trash directory >> content. I started a GC process from my session to monitor it >> closely. > >Daily GC recap: > >* The GC process I started yesterday, did collect 5.5TiB in > approximately 24 hours, that are now in the /gnu/store/trash > directory. > >* The /gnu/store/trash directory contains 288910 entries. If those >items > are removed at the same rate than on the previous days, it will take > days/months to delete them all. On another note: when 'guix gc' determines that objects are dead, are they really dead then or can it be that they are 'locally' dead but in case the store serves as substitutes/offload server some external clients may still request dead objects? In the either case would make sense to run the GC more frequently, but for the later case a --min-age option to preserve objects that just died recently could be helping. Further it may consider the atime of objects for removal. And finally while I had this Idea: You mount the guix store with 'relatime' or 'nodiratme', if not that could explain the slow deletion process as well! Christian > >* I noticed that the upstream Nix GC process can now operate without > locking. I think it shouldn't be too hard to port it to our fork or > maybe rewrite the process in Guile while we are at it. > > That will not fix the slow hard-drives issues though. > >Thanks, > >Mathieu > > > From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: GC takes more than 9 hours on berlin Resent-From: Mathieu Othacehe Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021 10:56:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Cc: rekado@elephly.net Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.163973853721483 (code B ref 51787); Fri, 17 Dec 2021 10:56:01 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Dec 2021 10:55:37 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38098 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1myAtl-0005aR-1y for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 17 Dec 2021 05:55:37 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:44560) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1myAti-0005a9-M1 for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 17 Dec 2021 05:55:35 -0500 Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=48796 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1myAtc-0006BE-R1; Fri, 17 Dec 2021 05:55:29 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:To: From; bh=UdydBjdTNVdollJXyJmFEtHnDfBaGwfw9N6HukRsDCU=; b=BsiOlDUc7QDyUiyko19M pQt5wkMwttedYr13iTY248Ir+ZxheEnAx+Y6ar/NDIz7Pg3tj42W964D4xVTlrZaERfYsY7HSu4j2 vs7Oi61WaoxL5eu1GmmulKzJvOpU3W2bD1EKHmeV0BKg/Mt1LQwocuD856OtTvzldOJwJVO3b3Z72 pxakDwhhPb/ylaIugVBdv9oL6gf6xhmchRSSMOcBeSyueabofc8XcvMKj8/y+ilwLLBhaIKFXcPlP NLnEruNbKvOOS50p+QkaXu+A6Rze+sORRpbmJt7y+sNsznPQMjJy8dAE18Q24Zt72lQPrI3rzz9BR kBFjLaa2HBcEaA==; Received: from [2a01:e0a:19b:d9a0:45b5:a14a:5c75:5737] (port=54094 helo=meije) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1myAtc-0002yz-K5; Fri, 17 Dec 2021 05:55:28 -0500 From: Mathieu Othacehe References: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> <87zgpuhig7.fsf@gnu.org> <87wnkv15k3.fsf@cbaines.net> <87zgpp971n.fsf@gnu.org> <87pmqet419.fsf@gnu.org> <87czm57zao.fsf@gnu.org> <87czm4bvzt.fsf@gnu.org> <877dcccrlq.fsf@gnu.org> <87a6h86s7o.fsf@gnu.org> <87bl1nxyt5.fsf@gnu.org> <87o85lhhrd.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021 11:55:26 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87o85lhhrd.fsf@gnu.org> (Mathieu Othacehe's message of "Sun, 12 Dec 2021 18:09:42 +0100") Message-ID: <8735mrec0x.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-=" X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Hey, New day, new benchmark. Berlin has two hard drives, which are roughly used this way: /dev/sda -> / (916G) /dev/sdb -> /gnu (37T) I ran the fio benchmark tool on both of them. See the reports attached, and the following summary: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- | | sda | sdb | |-------+-----------+-----------| | read | 1565KiB/s | 9695KiB/s | | write | 523KiB/s | 3240KiB/s | --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- I'm not sure how slow those figures are relatively to the hard drives technologies. Ricardo, any idea about that? My own NVME hard drive has 294MiB/s read and 98.1MiB/s write with the same test in comparison. I also tried to benchmark file removal this way, but this is not really conclusive: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- # 3.8s on sdb time for i in {0..100000}; do echo 'test' > "fs_test/test${i}.txt"; done # 2.7s on sdb time rf -rf fs_test --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- Thanks, Mathieu --=-=-= Content-Type: application/octet-stream Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=fio_sda Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 bWF0aGlldUBiZXJsaW4gfiQgZmlvIC0tcmFuZHJlcGVhdD0xIC0taW9lbmdpbmU9bGliYWlvIC0t ZGlyZWN0PTEgLS1ndG9kX3JlZHVjZT0xIC0tbmFtZT10ZXN0IC0tZmlsZW5hbWU9dGVzdCAtLWJz PTRrIC0taW9kZXB0aD02NCAtLXNpemU9NEcgLS1yZWFkd3JpdGU9cmFuZHJ3IC0tcndtaXhyZWFk PTc1CnRlc3Q6IChnPTApOiBydz1yYW5kcncsIGJzPShSKSA0MDk2Qi00MDk2QiwgKFcpIDQwOTZC LTQwOTZCLCAoVCkgNDA5NkItNDA5NkIsIGlvZW5naW5lPWxpYmFpbywgaW9kZXB0aD02NApmaW8t My4yOApTdGFydGluZyAxIHByb2Nlc3MKdGVzdDogTGF5aW5nIG91dCBJTyBmaWxlICgxIGZpbGUg LyA0MDk2TWlCKQpKb2JzOiAxIChmPTEpOiBbbSgxKV1bMTAwLjAlXVtyPTE0MzdLaUIvcyx3PTQy OEtpQi9zXVtyPTM1OSx3PTEwNyBJT1BTXVtldGEgMDBtOjAwc10KdGVzdDogKGdyb3VwaWQ9MCwg am9icz0xKTogZXJyPSAwOiBwaWQ9NzE5MjQ6IEZyaSBEZWMgMTcgMTE6MTc6MTIgMjAyMQogIHJl YWQ6IElPUFM9MzkxLCBCVz0xNTY1S2lCL3MgKDE2MDJrQi9zKSgzMDcwTWlCLzIwMDg4Njhtc2Vj KQogICBidyAoICBLaUIvcyk6IG1pbj0gIDMwNCwgbWF4PSAzMTkwLCBwZXI9MTAwLjAwJSwgYXZn PTE1NjYuMzAsIHN0ZGV2PTMyMy4yMywgc2FtcGxlcz00MDE0CiAgIGlvcHMgICAgICAgIDogbWlu PSAgIDc2LCBtYXg9ICA3OTcsIGF2Zz0zOTEuNDgsIHN0ZGV2PTgwLjg0LCBzYW1wbGVzPTQwMTQK ICB3cml0ZTogSU9QUz0xMzAsIEJXPTUyM0tpQi9zICg1MzZrQi9zKSgxMDI2TWlCLzIwMDg4Njht c2VjKTsgMCB6b25lIHJlc2V0cwogICBidyAoICBLaUIvcyk6IG1pbj0gIDEyMCwgbWF4PSAxMTQ2 LCBwZXI9MTAwLjAwJSwgYXZnPTUyMy40Mywgc3RkZXY9MTI0LjIxLCBzYW1wbGVzPTQwMTQKICAg aW9wcyAgICAgICAgOiBtaW49ICAgMzAsIG1heD0gIDI4NiwgYXZnPTEzMC44MCwgc3RkZXY9MzEu MDYsIHNhbXBsZXM9NDAxNAogIGNwdSAgICAgICAgICA6IHVzcj0wLjE2JSwgc3lzPTAuNTglLCBj dHg9MTAzOTQyNSwgbWFqZj0wLCBtaW5mPTU4OQogIElPIGRlcHRocyAgICA6IDE9MC4xJSwgMj0w LjElLCA0PTAuMSUsIDg9MC4xJSwgMTY9MC4xJSwgMzI9MC4xJSwgPj02ND0xMDAuMCUKICAgICBz dWJtaXQgICAgOiAwPTAuMCUsIDQ9MTAwLjAlLCA4PTAuMCUsIDE2PTAuMCUsIDMyPTAuMCUsIDY0 PTAuMCUsID49NjQ9MC4wJQogICAgIGNvbXBsZXRlICA6IDA9MC4wJSwgND0xMDAuMCUsIDg9MC4w JSwgMTY9MC4wJSwgMzI9MC4wJSwgNjQ9MC4xJSwgPj02ND0wLjAlCiAgICAgaXNzdWVkIHJ3dHM6 IHRvdGFsPTc4NTkyMCwyNjI2NTYsMCwwIHNob3J0PTAsMCwwLDAgZHJvcHBlZD0wLDAsMCwwCiAg ICAgbGF0ZW5jeSAgIDogdGFyZ2V0PTAsIHdpbmRvdz0wLCBwZXJjZW50aWxlPTEwMC4wMCUsIGRl cHRoPTY0CgpSdW4gc3RhdHVzIGdyb3VwIDAgKGFsbCBqb2JzKToKICAgUkVBRDogYnc9MTU2NUtp Qi9zICgxNjAya0IvcyksIDE1NjVLaUIvcy0xNTY1S2lCL3MgKDE2MDJrQi9zLTE2MDJrQi9zKSwg aW89MzA3ME1pQiAoMzIxOU1CKSwgcnVuPTIwMDg4NjgtMjAwODg2OG1zZWMKICBXUklURTogYnc9 NTIzS2lCL3MgKDUzNmtCL3MpLCA1MjNLaUIvcy01MjNLaUIvcyAoNTM2a0Ivcy01MzZrQi9zKSwg aW89MTAyNk1pQiAoMTA3Nk1CKSwgcnVuPTIwMDg4NjgtMjAwODg2OG1zZWMKCkRpc2sgc3RhdHMg KHJlYWQvd3JpdGUpOgogIHNkYTogaW9zPTgwNTczNC8zNjQxNzQsIG1lcmdlPTcxNDMvMzcxMDAs IHRpY2tzPTEzNzU4Njk2OS80MTMwOCwgaW5fcXVldWU9MTM3NjI4Mjc3LCB1dGlsPTk5LjcxJQoK bWF0aGlldUBiZXJsaW4gfiQgZmlvIC0tcmFuZHJlcGVhdD0xIC0taW9lbmdpbmU9bGliYWlvIC0t ZGlyZWN0PTEgLS1ndG9kX3JlZHVjZT0xIC0tbmFtZT10ZXN0IC0tZmlsZW5hbWU9L3Zhci9jYWNo ZS90ZXN0IC0tYnM9NGsgLS1pb2RlcHRoPTY0IC0tc2l6ZT00RyAtLXJlYWR3cml0ZT1yYW5kcncg LS1yd21peHJlYWQ9NzUKdGVzdDogKGc9MCk6IHJ3PXJhbmRydywgYnM9KFIpIDQwOTZCLTQwOTZC LCAoVykgNDA5NkItNDA5NkIsIChUKSA0MDk2Qi00MDk2QiwgaW9lbmdpbmU9bGliYWlvLCBpb2Rl cHRoPTY0CmZpby0zLjI4ClN0YXJ0aW5nIDEgcHJvY2Vzcwp0ZXN0OiBMYXlpbmcgb3V0IElPIGZp bGUgKDEgZmlsZSAvIDQwOTZNaUIpCmZpbzogcGlkPTAsIGVycj0xMy9maWxlOmZpbGVzZXR1cC5j OjE3NCwgZnVuYz1vcGVuLCBlcnJvcj1QZXJtaXNzaW9uIGRlbmllZAo= --=-=-= Content-Type: application/octet-stream Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=fio_sdb Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 bWF0aGlldUBiZXJsaW4gfiQgZmlvIC0tcmFuZHJlcGVhdD0xIC0taW9lbmdpbmU9bGliYWlvIC0t ZGlyZWN0PTEgLS1ndG9kX3JlZHVjZT0xIC0tbmFtZT10ZXN0IC0tZmlsZW5hbWU9L3Zhci9jYWNo ZS90ZXN0IC0tYnM9NGsgLS1pb2RlcHRoPTY0IC0tc2l6ZT00RyAtLXJlYWR3cml0ZT1yYW5kcncg LS1yd21peHJlYWQ9NzUKdGVzdDogKGc9MCk6IHJ3PXJhbmRydywgYnM9KFIpIDQwOTZCLTQwOTZC LCAoVykgNDA5NkItNDA5NkIsIChUKSA0MDk2Qi00MDk2QiwgaW9lbmdpbmU9bGliYWlvLCBpb2Rl cHRoPTY0CmZpby0zLjI4ClN0YXJ0aW5nIDEgcHJvY2Vzcwp0ZXN0OiBMYXlpbmcgb3V0IElPIGZp bGUgKDEgZmlsZSAvIDQwOTZNaUIpCmZpbzogcGlkPTAsIGVycj0xMy9maWxlOmZpbGVzZXR1cC5j OjE3NCwgZnVuYz1vcGVuLCBlcnJvcj1QZXJtaXNzaW9uIGRlbmllZAoKClJ1biBzdGF0dXMgZ3Jv dXAgMCAoYWxsIGpvYnMpOgptYXRoaWV1QGJlcmxpbiB+JCBzdWRvIGZpbyAtLXJhbmRyZXBlYXQ9 MSAtLWlvZW5naW5lPWxpYmFpbyAtLWRpcmVjdD0xIC0tZ3RvZF9yZWR1Y2U9MSAtLW5hbWU9dGVz dCAtLWZpbGVuYW1lPS92YXIvY2FjaGUvdGVzdCAtLWJzPTRrIC0taW9kZXB0aD02NCAtLXNpemU9 NEcgLS1yZWFkd3JpdGU9cmFuZHJ3IC0tcndtaXhyZWFkPTc1ClBhc3N3b3JkOiAKdGVzdDogKGc9 MCk6IHJ3PXJhbmRydywgYnM9KFIpIDQwOTZCLTQwOTZCLCAoVykgNDA5NkItNDA5NkIsIChUKSA0 MDk2Qi00MDk2QiwgaW9lbmdpbmU9bGliYWlvLCBpb2RlcHRoPTY0CmZpby0zLjI4ClN0YXJ0aW5n IDEgcHJvY2Vzcwp0ZXN0OiBMYXlpbmcgb3V0IElPIGZpbGUgKDEgZmlsZSAvIDQwOTZNaUIpCkpv YnM6IDEgKGY9MSk6IFttKDEpXVsxMDAuMCVdW3I9NjYxMEtpQi9zLHc9MjE5MEtpQi9zXVtyPTE2 NTIsdz01NDcgSU9QU11bZXRhIDAwbTowMHNdCnRlc3Q6IChncm91cGlkPTAsIGpvYnM9MSk6IGVy cj0gMDogcGlkPTQ5Mjc0OiBGcmkgRGVjIDE3IDExOjMwOjM4IDIwMjEKICByZWFkOiBJT1BTPTI0 MjMsIEJXPTk2OTVLaUIvcyAoOTkyN2tCL3MpKDMwNzBNaUIvMzI0MjcwbXNlYykKICAgYncgKCAg S2lCL3MpOiBtaW49IDIzOTIsIG1heD0xNzgwOCwgcGVyPTEwMC4wMCUsIGF2Zz05NzA0LjA2LCBz dGRldj0yNDc2LjA4LCBzYW1wbGVzPTY0OAogICBpb3BzICAgICAgICA6IG1pbj0gIDU5OCwgbWF4 PSA0NDUyLCBhdmc9MjQyNS45Miwgc3RkZXY9NjE5LjAyLCBzYW1wbGVzPTY0OAogIHdyaXRlOiBJ T1BTPTgwOSwgQlc9MzI0MEtpQi9zICgzMzE4a0IvcykoMTAyNk1pQi8zMjQyNzBtc2VjKTsgMCB6 b25lIHJlc2V0cwogICBidyAoICBLaUIvcyk6IG1pbj0gMTA4MCwgbWF4PSA1OTY4LCBwZXI9MTAw LjAwJSwgYXZnPTMyNDMuMjcsIHN0ZGV2PTgzMy45Nywgc2FtcGxlcz02NDgKICAgaW9wcyAgICAg ICAgOiBtaW49ICAyNzAsIG1heD0gMTQ5MiwgYXZnPTgxMC43MSwgc3RkZXY9MjA4LjQ5LCBzYW1w bGVzPTY0OAogIGNwdSAgICAgICAgICA6IHVzcj0wLjU1JSwgc3lzPTIuODQlLCBjdHg9MTAwNDc0 OSwgbWFqZj0wLCBtaW5mPTEyOQogIElPIGRlcHRocyAgICA6IDE9MC4xJSwgMj0wLjElLCA0PTAu MSUsIDg9MC4xJSwgMTY9MC4xJSwgMzI9MC4xJSwgPj02ND0xMDAuMCUKICAgICBzdWJtaXQgICAg OiAwPTAuMCUsIDQ9MTAwLjAlLCA4PTAuMCUsIDE2PTAuMCUsIDMyPTAuMCUsIDY0PTAuMCUsID49 NjQ9MC4wJQogICAgIGNvbXBsZXRlICA6IDA9MC4wJSwgND0xMDAuMCUsIDg9MC4wJSwgMTY9MC4w JSwgMzI9MC4wJSwgNjQ9MC4xJSwgPj02ND0wLjAlCiAgICAgaXNzdWVkIHJ3dHM6IHRvdGFsPTc4 NTkyMCwyNjI2NTYsMCwwIHNob3J0PTAsMCwwLDAgZHJvcHBlZD0wLDAsMCwwCiAgICAgbGF0ZW5j eSAgIDogdGFyZ2V0PTAsIHdpbmRvdz0wLCBwZXJjZW50aWxlPTEwMC4wMCUsIGRlcHRoPTY0CgpS dW4gc3RhdHVzIGdyb3VwIDAgKGFsbCBqb2JzKToKICAgUkVBRDogYnc9OTY5NUtpQi9zICg5OTI3 a0IvcyksIDk2OTVLaUIvcy05Njk1S2lCL3MgKDk5MjdrQi9zLTk5MjdrQi9zKSwgaW89MzA3ME1p QiAoMzIxOU1CKSwgcnVuPTMyNDI3MC0zMjQyNzBtc2VjCiAgV1JJVEU6IGJ3PTMyNDBLaUIvcyAo MzMxOGtCL3MpLCAzMjQwS2lCL3MtMzI0MEtpQi9zICgzMzE4a0Ivcy0zMzE4a0IvcyksIGlvPTEw MjZNaUIgKDEwNzZNQiksIHJ1bj0zMjQyNzAtMzI0MjcwbXNlYwoKRGlzayBzdGF0cyAocmVhZC93 cml0ZSk6CiAgc2RiOiBpb3M9NzkwOTMwLzI3MDg0NiwgbWVyZ2U9MjUzOS8xMDY4MywgdGlja3M9 MjE5ODIwMjYvMjY0NjI5LCBpbl9xdWV1ZT0yMjI0NjY2NiwgdXRpbD0xMDAuMDAlCg== --=-=-=-- From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: GC takes more than 9 hours on berlin Resent-From: Ricardo Wurmus Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021 13:31:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Mathieu Othacehe Cc: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.163974784814513 (code B ref 51787); Fri, 17 Dec 2021 13:31:01 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Dec 2021 13:30:48 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38281 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1myDJv-0003m1-TH for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 17 Dec 2021 08:30:48 -0500 Received: from sender3-of-o51.zoho.com ([136.143.184.51]:21772) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1myDJt-0003ls-VU for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 17 Dec 2021 08:30:46 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1639747839; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=c4Roby/W35q0OwiPkK6+O2u+x43X8BQR/3xL7pD7cx1EfTUMsC5xo0xDDOGqtD5PKa9OymJqVNMyR/4nn1FNriqj1gK23MYJ1ALB0DRztqgTDWEbQkEBxqx3erTBOB7x2eswIfu7cLIu1fVGHk9/gpTiage7flVbRLPomh6JpKU= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1639747839; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:From:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Message-ID:References:Subject:To; bh=/SXamSEv7clD/9M9R0Ma/Lyue7wr6H9gbgXwG2ZI7p0=; b=T6yNtx4korOCHT/UB00kaJgCkEu0iub4Tir6OIQDn110rxToD7Jj+M6LYNv3L0N6voTn2NbLTK5VGtiJIBJuBsP/Cc7HgzeUlriRU3srZQPy+jKLlZk0MTVoFZChLiBxarRm35gK4cB1RkI4yNP7GNDcgIDEElT8vij7mmcA/hA= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; dkim=pass header.i=elephly.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=rekado@elephly.net; dmarc=pass header.from= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1639747839; s=zoho; d=elephly.net; i=rekado@elephly.net; h=References:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-reply-to:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=/SXamSEv7clD/9M9R0Ma/Lyue7wr6H9gbgXwG2ZI7p0=; b=g+QWkNkozUJk7Z+FvDMBl3OLnETpeGtZkeTBETLWTmd9Wrk7ij85GVpNS0EAaN08 S/d96qTafdKSGpyO7z1gNbJtzQZy8x25HkCAfTIOPT3xqRXv01aWAJPTVfYZn1uoGRm NR51ii0cb2Q7RSk+qoJcqwU+rcuXdlBbctRmrVME= Received: from localhost (p54ad487d.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.173.72.125]) by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1639747836525936.8960152899299; Fri, 17 Dec 2021 05:30:36 -0800 (PST) References: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> <87zgpuhig7.fsf@gnu.org> <87wnkv15k3.fsf@cbaines.net> <87zgpp971n.fsf@gnu.org> <87pmqet419.fsf@gnu.org> <87czm57zao.fsf@gnu.org> <87czm4bvzt.fsf@gnu.org> <877dcccrlq.fsf@gnu.org> <87a6h86s7o.fsf@gnu.org> <87bl1nxyt5.fsf@gnu.org> <87o85lhhrd.fsf@gnu.org> <8735mrec0x.fsf@gnu.org> User-agent: mu4e 1.6.10; emacs 28.0.50 From: Ricardo Wurmus Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021 14:06:51 +0100 In-reply-to: <8735mrec0x.fsf@gnu.org> X-URL: https://elephly.net X-PGP-Key: https://elephly.net/rekado.pubkey X-PGP-Fingerprint: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6 2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC Message-ID: <87ilvnjr49.fsf@elephly.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-ZohoMailClient: External X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hi Mathieu, > New day, new benchmark. Berlin has two hard drives, which are roughly > used this way: > > /dev/sda -> / (916G) > /dev/sdb -> /gnu (37T) sda consists of two local hard disks that are combined to a RAID. Here are the disk details: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- Disk.Bay.0:Enclosure.Internal.0-1:RAID.Slot.3-1 Status =3D Ok=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 DeviceDescription =3D Disk 0 in Backplane 1 of RAID Contr= oller in Slot 3 RollupStatus =3D Ok=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 Name =3D Physical Disk 0:1:0=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 State =3D Online=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20 OperationState =3D Not Applicable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 PowerStatus =3D Spun-Up=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 Size =3D 931.000 GB=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 FailurePredicted =3D NO=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 RemainingRatedWriteEndurance =3D Not Applicable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 SecurityStatus =3D Not Capable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 BusProtocol =3D SATA=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20 MediaType =3D HDD=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 UsedRaidDiskSpace =3D 931.000 GB=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 AvailableRaidDiskSpace =3D 0.001 GB=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 Hotspare =3D NO=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 Manufacturer =3D SEAGATE=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 ProductId =3D ST1000NX0443=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 Revision =3D NB33=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20 SerialNumber =3D W470QK7K=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 PartNumber =3D CN08DN1YSGW0076S00L8A00=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 NegotiatedSpeed =3D 6.0 Gb/s=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 ManufacturedDay =3D 0=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20 ManufacturedWeek =3D 0=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20 ManufacturedYear =3D 0=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20 ForeignKeyIdentifier =3D null=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20 SasAddress =3D 0x4433221106000000=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 FormFactor =3D 2.5 Inch=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 RaidNominalMediumRotationRate =3D 7200=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20 T10PICapability =3D Not Capable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 BlockSizeInBytes =3D 512=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 MaxCapableSpeed =3D 6 Gb/s=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20 RaidType =3D None=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20 SystemEraseCapability =3D CryptographicErasePD=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 SelfEncryptingDriveCapability =3D Not Capable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 EncryptionCapability =3D Not Capable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 CryptographicEraseCapability =3D Capable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 Disk.Bay.1:Enclosure.Internal.0-1:RAID.Slot.3-1 Status =3D Ok=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 DeviceDescription =3D Disk 1 in Backplane 1 of RAID Contr= oller in Slot 3 RollupStatus =3D Ok=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 Name =3D Physical Disk 0:1:1=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 State =3D Online=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20 OperationState =3D Not Applicable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 PowerStatus =3D Spun-Up=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 Size =3D 931.000 GB=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 FailurePredicted =3D NO=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 RemainingRatedWriteEndurance =3D Not Applicable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 SecurityStatus =3D Not Capable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 BusProtocol =3D SATA=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20 MediaType =3D HDD=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 UsedRaidDiskSpace =3D 931.000 GB=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 AvailableRaidDiskSpace =3D 0.001 GB=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 Hotspare =3D NO=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 Manufacturer =3D SEAGATE=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 ProductId =3D ST1000NX0443=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 Revision =3D NB33=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20 SerialNumber =3D W470SYTP=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 PartNumber =3D CN08DN1YSGW0077F00FQA00=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 NegotiatedSpeed =3D 6.0 Gb/s=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 ManufacturedDay =3D 0=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20 ManufacturedWeek =3D 0=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20 ManufacturedYear =3D 0=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20 ForeignKeyIdentifier =3D null=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20 SasAddress =3D 0x4433221107000000=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 FormFactor =3D 2.5 Inch=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 RaidNominalMediumRotationRate =3D 7200=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20 T10PICapability =3D Not Capable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 BlockSizeInBytes =3D 512=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 MaxCapableSpeed =3D 6 Gb/s=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20 RaidType =3D None=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20 SystemEraseCapability =3D CryptographicErasePD=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 SelfEncryptingDriveCapability =3D Not Capable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 EncryptionCapability =3D Not Capable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 CryptographicEraseCapability =3D Capable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20 --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- sdb is an external storage array (Dell MD3400) filled with 10 hard disks (SAS) in a RAID 10 configuration (36.36 TB effective capacity). There are two hot spares that are currently unassigned. They are used automatically when the RAID is degraded. The two RAID controllers have read and write caches enabled. The enclosure has two redundant host interfaces. Berlin has two host based adapter cards of which *one* is connected to the array. Why only one? Because we don=E2=80=99t have multipathd configu= red so that the system could *boot* off the external array with multipath. Without multipath the storage would appear as one disk device per card, but it would not be safe to mount them both at the same time. If we wanted to make use of the redundant connection here: figure out how to add multipathd to the initrd and set up multipath *before* handing off control to Linux. This would effectively double our bandwidth to the storage. My guess is that we=E2=80=99re not even close to saturating the available bandwidth. > I ran the fio benchmark tool on both of them. See the reports > attached, and the following summary: > > | | sda | sdb | > |-------+-----------+-----------| > | read | 1565KiB/s | 9695KiB/s | > | write | 523KiB/s | 3240KiB/s | > > > I'm not sure how slow those figures are relatively to the hard drives > technologies. Ricardo, any idea about that? It seems awfully slow. Especially performance of sda is abysmal: this is a local disk. sdb is the fancy external disk array that=E2=80=99s hooke= d up to two HBA cards. It should not perform *better* than sda. I=E2=80=99ll run this on a few of the build nodes to get some more comparis= ons. --=20 Ricardo From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: GC takes more than 9 hours on berlin Resent-From: Ricardo Wurmus Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021 14:15:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Mathieu Othacehe Cc: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.163975047919107 (code B ref 51787); Fri, 17 Dec 2021 14:15:01 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Dec 2021 14:14:39 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38334 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1myE0N-0004y6-9R for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 17 Dec 2021 09:14:39 -0500 Received: from sender3-of-o50.zoho.com ([136.143.184.50]:21669) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1myE0L-0004xy-IG for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 17 Dec 2021 09:14:38 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1639750470; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=TFnzGphVLgNRb63se+z6jRBSlI5K+zGTs1jUCDrGbTgUzX26XPXZOHw88QAmTq3fGiVVNGPAPNaYvWAQT8s0cGjoQGPjaxlZFP8JuVjWAsJd9ut7VzCEn8CKPCL4KqIgx9eWDUapSYykYr2A0c/1Mwknm6AH7CYStMqcmghLrs8= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1639750470; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:From:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Message-ID:References:Subject:To; bh=Ikt2TH0Dzv1tszYqaPfLsaj0ORKSesEW9ZdyfI56PkA=; b=Fc71qshKV7Fru2UAMPctS83ul3U0VeLROkhndGD9ol47Rom45Uh2IA7sakiqJ7kyg7rZsHTHYCm4sFUHL6CMGV4hyp3id8uLq9xJvsvU0kAIAgTuwKrtqo9m8ie2D0ln1lznnSo6qO9Tsu2cIFNibpwAq3eUckbwpp0zMFtQJ6s= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; dkim=pass header.i=elephly.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=rekado@elephly.net; dmarc=pass header.from= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1639750470; s=zoho; d=elephly.net; i=rekado@elephly.net; h=References:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-reply-to:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=Ikt2TH0Dzv1tszYqaPfLsaj0ORKSesEW9ZdyfI56PkA=; b=ibzHIMbK/FWYWk2nCyd86n70dMjWaQ1xCe4DHX9mODLFao+Dtt1c2rQ5qrnhogAq EHGaFytN2FRjklzc+saa6RyRkm0jJczYLgLDGY9QapThCOHsn4hiISN6bjd0lZbLZt0 pN+ncr/VE2QtWHlY64hfnQCtM28jE4Yz+iWt0bBA= Received: from localhost (p54ad487d.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.173.72.125]) by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1639750467533243.42228182621022; Fri, 17 Dec 2021 06:14:27 -0800 (PST) References: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> <87zgpuhig7.fsf@gnu.org> <87wnkv15k3.fsf@cbaines.net> <87zgpp971n.fsf@gnu.org> <87pmqet419.fsf@gnu.org> <87czm57zao.fsf@gnu.org> <87czm4bvzt.fsf@gnu.org> <877dcccrlq.fsf@gnu.org> <87a6h86s7o.fsf@gnu.org> <87bl1nxyt5.fsf@gnu.org> <87o85lhhrd.fsf@gnu.org> <8735mrec0x.fsf@gnu.org> <87ilvnjr49.fsf@elephly.net> User-agent: mu4e 1.6.10; emacs 27.2 From: Ricardo Wurmus Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021 15:08:23 +0100 In-reply-to: <87ilvnjr49.fsf@elephly.net> X-URL: https://elephly.net X-PGP-Key: https://elephly.net/rekado.pubkey X-PGP-Fingerprint: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6 2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC Message-ID: <878rwjl3nj.fsf@elephly.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-ZohoMailClient: External X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Ricardo Wurmus writes: > I=E2=80=99ll run this on a few of the build nodes to get some more compar= isons. I ran =E2=80=9Cguix deploy=E2=80=9D for hydra-guix-107, a node that was bou= ght at the same time as the one that is now the head node of ci.guix.gnu.org. I copied over a current Guix and installed =E2=80=9Cfio=E2=80=9D (/gnu/store/qs9cyy5s95n2fbjmxs48iccqvsvj6wxr-fio-3.28/bin/fio) there. Here=E2=80=99s the output: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- root@hydra-guix-107 ~# fio --randrepeat=3D1 --ioengine=3Dlibaio --direct=3D= 1 --gtod_reduce=3D1 --name=3Dtest --filename=3Dtest --bs=3D4k --iodepth=3D6= 4 --size=3D4G --readwrite=3Drandrw --rwmixread=3D75 test: (g=3D0): rw=3Drandrw, bs=3D(R) 4096B-4096B, (W) 4096B-4096B, (T) 4096= B-4096B, ioengine=3Dlibaio, iodepth=3D64 fio-3.28 Starting 1 process test: Laying out IO file (1 file / 4096MiB) Jobs: 1 (f=3D1): [m(1)][100.0%][r=3D172MiB/s,w=3D56.9MiB/s][r=3D44.2k,w=3D1= 4.6k IOPS][eta 00m:00s] test: (groupid=3D0, jobs=3D1): err=3D 0: pid=3D45365: Fri Dec 17 14:50:41 2= 021 read: IOPS=3D42.9k, BW=3D167MiB/s (176MB/s)(3070MiB/18331msec) bw ( KiB/s): min=3D21208, max=3D199928, per=3D100.00%, avg=3D171621.56,= stdev=3D46624.05, samples=3D36 iops : min=3D 5302, max=3D49982, avg=3D42905.39, stdev=3D11656.01= , samples=3D36 write: IOPS=3D14.3k, BW=3D56.0MiB/s (58.7MB/s)(1026MiB/18331msec); 0 zone= resets bw ( KiB/s): min=3D 7424, max=3D66720, per=3D100.00%, avg=3D57364.22, s= tdev=3D15612.42, samples=3D36 iops : min=3D 1856, max=3D16680, avg=3D14341.06, stdev=3D3903.10,= samples=3D36 cpu : usr=3D6.27%, sys=3D24.78%, ctx=3D121626, majf=3D0, minf=3D= 11 IO depths : 1=3D0.1%, 2=3D0.1%, 4=3D0.1%, 8=3D0.1%, 16=3D0.1%, 32=3D0.= 1%, >=3D64=3D100.0% submit : 0=3D0.0%, 4=3D100.0%, 8=3D0.0%, 16=3D0.0%, 32=3D0.0%, 64= =3D0.0%, >=3D64=3D0.0% complete : 0=3D0.0%, 4=3D100.0%, 8=3D0.0%, 16=3D0.0%, 32=3D0.0%, 64= =3D0.1%, >=3D64=3D0.0% issued rwts: total=3D785920,262656,0,0 short=3D0,0,0,0 dropped=3D0,0,0= ,0 latency : target=3D0, window=3D0, percentile=3D100.00%, depth=3D64 Run status group 0 (all jobs): READ: bw=3D167MiB/s (176MB/s), 167MiB/s-167MiB/s (176MB/s-176MB/s), io= =3D3070MiB (3219MB), run=3D18331-18331msec WRITE: bw=3D56.0MiB/s (58.7MB/s), 56.0MiB/s-56.0MiB/s (58.7MB/s-58.7MB/s)= , io=3D1026MiB (1076MB), run=3D18331-18331msec Disk stats (read/write): sda: ios=3D779469/260494, merge=3D0/6, ticks=3D932265/195191, in_queue=3D= 1127456, util=3D99.50% --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- Here sda is RAID of two SSDs: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- racadm>>storage get pdisks -o Disk.Bay.0:Enclosure.Internal.0-1:RAID.Integrated.1-1 Status =3D Ok=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 DeviceDescription =3D Disk 0 in Backplane 1 of Integrated= RAID Controller 1 RollupStatus =3D Ok=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 Name =3D Solid State Disk 0:1:0=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 State =3D Online=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20 OperationState =3D Not Applicable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 PowerStatus =3D On=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 Size =3D 223.001 GB=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 FailurePredicted =3D NO=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 RemainingRatedWriteEndurance =3D 99 %=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20 SecurityStatus =3D Not Capable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 BusProtocol =3D SATA=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20 MediaType =3D SSD=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 UsedRaidDiskSpace =3D 223.001 GB=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 AvailableRaidDiskSpace =3D 0.001 GB=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 Hotspare =3D NO=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 Manufacturer =3D INTEL=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20 ProductId =3D SSDSC2KG240G8R=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 Revision =3D XCV1DL67=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 SerialNumber =3D BTYG91520CHD240AGN=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 PartNumber =3D CN0T1WH8PESIT95302LTA01=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 NegotiatedSpeed =3D 6.0 Gb/s=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 ManufacturedDay =3D 0=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20 ManufacturedWeek =3D 0=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20 ManufacturedYear =3D 0=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20 ForeignKeyIdentifier =3D null=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20 SasAddress =3D 0x4433221104000000=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 WWN =3D 0x4433221104000000=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 FormFactor =3D 2.5 Inch=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 RaidNominalMediumRotationRate =3D 1=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20 T10PICapability =3D Not Capable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 BlockSizeInBytes =3D 512=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 MaxCapableSpeed =3D 6 Gb/s=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20 RaidType =3D Unknown=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 SystemEraseCapability =3D CryptographicErasePD=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 SelfEncryptingDriveCapability =3D Not Capable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 EncryptionCapability =3D Not Capable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 CryptographicEraseCapability =3D Capable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 Certified =3D Yes=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 NonRAIDDiskCachePolicy =3D Not Applicable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 EncryptionProtocol =3D None=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20 Disk.Bay.1:Enclosure.Internal.0-1:RAID.Integrated.1-1 Status =3D Ok=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 DeviceDescription =3D Disk 1 in Backplane 1 of Integrated= RAID Controller 1 RollupStatus =3D Ok=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 Name =3D Solid State Disk 0:1:1=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 State =3D Online=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20 OperationState =3D Not Applicable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 PowerStatus =3D On=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 Size =3D 223.001 GB=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 FailurePredicted =3D NO=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 RemainingRatedWriteEndurance =3D 99 %=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20 SecurityStatus =3D Not Capable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 BusProtocol =3D SATA=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20 MediaType =3D SSD=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 UsedRaidDiskSpace =3D 223.001 GB=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 AvailableRaidDiskSpace =3D 0.001 GB=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 Hotspare =3D NO=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 Manufacturer =3D INTEL=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20 ProductId =3D SSDSC2KG240G8R=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 Revision =3D XCV1DL67=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 SerialNumber =3D BTYG915502D9240AGN=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 PartNumber =3D CN0T1WH8PESIT95303BSA01=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 NegotiatedSpeed =3D 6.0 Gb/s=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 ManufacturedDay =3D 0=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20 ManufacturedWeek =3D 0=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20 ManufacturedYear =3D 0=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20 ForeignKeyIdentifier =3D null=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20 SasAddress =3D 0x4433221100000000=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 WWN =3D 0x4433221100000000=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 FormFactor =3D 2.5 Inch=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 RaidNominalMediumRotationRate =3D 1=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20 T10PICapability =3D Not Capable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 BlockSizeInBytes =3D 512=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 MaxCapableSpeed =3D 6 Gb/s=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20 RaidType =3D Unknown=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 SystemEraseCapability =3D CryptographicErasePD=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 SelfEncryptingDriveCapability =3D Not Capable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 EncryptionCapability =3D Not Capable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 CryptographicEraseCapability =3D Capable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 Certified =3D Yes=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 NonRAIDDiskCachePolicy =3D Not Applicable=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 EncryptionProtocol =3D None=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20 --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- --=20 Ricardo From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: Disk performance on ci.guix.gnu.org Resent-From: Mathieu Othacehe Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:00:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Ricardo Wurmus Cc: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.164001958823426 (code B ref 51787); Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:00:02 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Dec 2021 16:59:48 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51290 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mzM0q-00065m-21 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 11:59:48 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:41468) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mzM0l-00065U-95 for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 11:59:46 -0500 Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=45860 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mzM0f-0006Qj-Mm; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 11:59:37 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:To: From; bh=e7FuET/gbny9oP4pAlIHUNGsUk69aMrMMJUL//G4nUQ=; b=fjYMwiw2wZsJe8/E9pqK ZUEGvsxP/FZZ+ZyfhEAGmNzDPeDbRXeqbzi92IiwdBB3KWq92AOdalMtXD6ix2/42jlM/evAFg0TT YoSb9cAGG/A/I7oRYQWAjl0fawMbN5MhGiR2vY1pQYetzurRSXv0NT3McmDRMUrMCcUxmLGTmSwmT r7IypUWlKtxHAIwX+j1SvcnGRrVoQNKb18RYNfRnsME1mFvgCCkJ7q9aFKfTanLJaSCnDAmaa/2ga vqheSYcsZ8a62S+eKrKr28RCB21vdssGY/HRP9v17YKIDjxrSRXp5U4BRkj7Ayj2YxvmLb3h+suBy BO0FAPPLtTkeBg==; Received: from [2a01:cb1e:72:d94a:2d41:6e45:df8f:384b] (port=51880 helo=meije) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mzM0e-0001dW-LZ; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 11:59:37 -0500 From: Mathieu Othacehe References: <875yrjpi1y.fsf@elephly.net> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:59:33 +0100 In-Reply-To: <875yrjpi1y.fsf@elephly.net> (Ricardo Wurmus's message of "Mon, 20 Dec 2021 13:32:33 +0100") Message-ID: <87o85bjjpm.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hey, > This is still pretty bad, but better than the <1M performance suggested > by previous runs. Mmh interesting, I also have a x10 speed up on sdb by increasing the block size from 4k to 512k. I'm not sure what conclusion should we draw from this observation. In particular for our most urging matter, /gnu/store/trash removal. Moving to a faster hard drive would definitely help here, but I still don't understand if that disk performance regression comes from Linux, the file-system fragmentation, or the disk itself. > READ: bw=1547MiB/s (1622MB/s), 1547MiB/s-1547MiB/s (1622MB/s-1622MB/s), io=3055MiB (3203MB), run=1975-1975msec > WRITE: bw=527MiB/s (553MB/s), 527MiB/s-527MiB/s (553MB/s-553MB/s), io=1042MiB (1092MB), run=1975-1975msec Wooh that's fast! On test could be to copy the /gnu/store/trash content to the SAN an observe how long that it takes for this operating to complete. Thanks for your support on that complex topic :) Mathieu From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: Disk performance on ci.guix.gnu.org Resent-From: Ricardo Wurmus Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:10:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Mathieu Othacehe Cc: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.164002015624584 (code B ref 51787); Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:10:02 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Dec 2021 17:09:16 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51306 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mzMA0-0006OS-FV for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 12:09:16 -0500 Received: from sender3-of-o52.zoho.com ([136.143.184.52]:21825) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mzM9y-0006OH-Kk for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 12:09:15 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1640020142; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=MvNsUk+rwORfasj6KHkegIkcbfSy2VRbpW6BqOSN26QYt6i0gcCoNhEVc05+wrgtbH1dKRUk/SORD6JXRadQPdTwZ9xvNvO6CYSHOe30FOsp9NvDN2PWRmdD2kTuQ8KchEi+5KwSUjL3hElKE/Z53ejA9709fwoMa3WnPZ8ti6Q= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1640020142; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:From:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Message-ID:References:Subject:To; bh=Srh+d2fQ4E4iG4E1DV7TLhqynfH2bnQi/pkoK3qRZVI=; b=SR0P0w3ddXAbXEPbZEzaqBzVAmaPtNh0Q7YUOqyjANJV9MdaYwRgQa2LSDPblCrZQcM6Ksjyh8g+fJEMvecu7eWjEL/sOivbmSPKX+mFJFZT8nS+YexyZziZ3Y9Qxh/VGMXKgMQzuRBT8Naq3n+elp/pjUlxGaawzRUd7WyHeCY= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; dkim=pass header.i=elephly.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=rekado@elephly.net; dmarc=pass header.from= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1640020142; s=zoho; d=elephly.net; i=rekado@elephly.net; h=References:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-reply-to:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=Srh+d2fQ4E4iG4E1DV7TLhqynfH2bnQi/pkoK3qRZVI=; b=LiNjnmvZVB51GNT6VLu9VqCrs9ECLKkPv50zmtQvb1J1gZFeZ2Y9hnLJUsN6RNLD m6ptsIcU3DRPK5H0AM+GD7oCxzayyeUMinSFfc1FMKSjVc2R2Sui8grG4esFNNYQI8V IRuBSyGAUidTL3fUXDCeVVkJwJtH1sDsSPNP/Ecc= Received: from localhost (p54ad4ec1.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.173.78.193]) by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 164002014099628.77387882910216; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 09:09:00 -0800 (PST) References: <875yrjpi1y.fsf@elephly.net> <87o85bjjpm.fsf@gnu.org> User-agent: mu4e 1.6.10; emacs 27.2 From: Ricardo Wurmus Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2021 18:05:08 +0100 In-reply-to: <87o85bjjpm.fsf@gnu.org> X-URL: https://elephly.net X-PGP-Key: https://elephly.net/rekado.pubkey X-PGP-Fingerprint: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6 2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC Message-ID: <871r27p5jq.fsf@elephly.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-ZohoMailClient: External X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Mathieu Othacehe writes: >> This is still pretty bad, but better than the <1M performance suggested >> by previous runs. > > Mmh interesting, I also have a x10 speed up on sdb by increasing the > block size from 4k to 512k. I'm not sure what conclusion should we draw > from this observation. As a general rule, we want the block size to match that of the configured disk layout =E2=80=94 if we care about getting the best numbers = in our benchmarks. With real workloads things are always going to be slower anyway. > In particular for our most urging matter, /gnu/store/trash > removal. Moving to a faster hard drive would definitely help here, but I > still don't understand if that disk performance regression comes from > Linux, the file-system fragmentation, or the disk itself. > >> READ: bw=3D1547MiB/s (1622MB/s), 1547MiB/s-1547MiB/s (1622MB/s-1622MB= /s), io=3D3055MiB (3203MB), run=3D1975-1975msec >> WRITE: bw=3D527MiB/s (553MB/s), 527MiB/s-527MiB/s (553MB/s-553MB/s), i= o=3D1042MiB (1092MB), run=3D1975-1975msec > > Wooh that's fast! On test could be to copy the /gnu/store/trash content > to the SAN an observe how long that it takes for this operating to > complete. Do you mean time the copy or time the removal from that storage? You know what, I=E2=80=99ll time both. I=E2=80=99ll need to get more space fir= st. I think the trash directory is larger than the 500G that I got for testing the SAN. > Thanks for your support on that complex topic :) Hey, I=E2=80=99m just happy neither of us has to do this alone. Thank you! --=20 Ricardo From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: Disk performance on ci.guix.gnu.org Resent-From: Bengt Richter Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2021 18:38:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Mathieu Othacehe Cc: Ricardo Wurmus , 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Reply-To: Bengt Richter Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.16400254271534 (code B ref 51787); Mon, 20 Dec 2021 18:38:01 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Dec 2021 18:37:07 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51437 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mzNX0-0000Og-Pp for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 13:37:06 -0500 Received: from imta-38.everyone.net ([216.200.145.38]:47114) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mzNWx-0000OW-Qu for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 13:37:05 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (omta003.sj2.proofpoint.com [127.0.0.1]) by imta-38.everyone.net (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 1BKIU9TT007220; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 10:37:02 -0800 X-Eon-Originating-Account: u6V8_VNW-eR85gZdCrnb2L0l1GHZTv2hQA_FHe9vDfQ X-Eon-Dm: m0116293.ppops.net Received: by m0116293.mta.everyone.net (EON-AUTHRELAY2 - 53b9213a) id m0116293.6195d1a3.20c606; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 10:37:01 -0800 X-Eon-Sig: AQMHrIJhwM1NRFnBAgIAAAAD,701f634b381ee43731596c40407deecf X-Eip: NcFhRzggRJtsCNG9cK0ReyYDVgZS-5eBCKPPAOxV6MQ Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2021 19:36:51 +0100 From: Bengt Richter Message-ID: <20211220183651.GA8380@LionPure> References: <875yrjpi1y.fsf@elephly.net> <87o85bjjpm.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87o85bjjpm.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Proofpoint-GUID: 3ncA-nKkl22u3UFxoQbdMBaU_lvs-a8S X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: 3ncA-nKkl22u3UFxoQbdMBaU_lvs-a8S X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.425, 18.0.790 definitions=2021-12-20_08:2021-12-20, 2021-12-20 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 bulkscore=0 suspectscore=0 mlxlogscore=432 clxscore=1034 lowpriorityscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 impostorscore=0 malwarescore=0 priorityscore=1501 mlxscore=0 spamscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2110150000 definitions=main-2112200103 X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.8 (/) On +2021-12-20 17:59:33 +0100, Mathieu Othacehe wrote: > > Hey, > > > This is still pretty bad, but better than the <1M performance suggested > > by previous runs. > > Mmh interesting, I also have a x10 speed up on sdb by increasing the > block size from 4k to 512k. I'm not sure what conclusion should we draw > from this observation. > > In particular for our most urging matter, /gnu/store/trash > removal. Moving to a faster hard drive would definitely help here, but I > still don't understand if that disk performance regression comes from > Linux, the file-system fragmentation, or the disk itself. > > > READ: bw=1547MiB/s (1622MB/s), 1547MiB/s-1547MiB/s (1622MB/s-1622MB/s), io=3055MiB (3203MB), run=1975-1975msec > > WRITE: bw=527MiB/s (553MB/s), 527MiB/s-527MiB/s (553MB/s-553MB/s), io=1042MiB (1092MB), run=1975-1975msec > > Wooh that's fast! On test could be to copy the /gnu/store/trash content > to the SAN an observe how long that it takes for this operating to > complete. also might be interesting to copy to /dev/null to see read rate alone on /gnu/store? > > Thanks for your support on that complex topic :) > > Mathieu > > > -- Regards, Bengt Richter From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: GC takes more than 9 hours on berlin References: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> Resent-From: Ricardo Wurmus Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2021 21:26:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.164003552318886 (code B ref 51787); Mon, 20 Dec 2021 21:26:01 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Dec 2021 21:25:23 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51591 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mzQ9q-0004uX-Rl for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 16:25:23 -0500 Received: from sender3-of-o52.zoho.com ([136.143.184.52]:21817) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mzQ9o-0004uO-IK for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 16:25:21 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1640035516; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=QHTqoZxDLzm2QLuJfLpwYtzrCl7TeciaKgkQDNvQ/XN60dEF2R6HnzKzYPsmOy1crw+bNXIJ8RLMDJktiXAh/b6qsp5BEIzArmBYlc418a4wPWtl4MLiZaVWnqPACwe8qifQB3EzpDQurn+kG6g1iTnLtvYht3jDEqBiMKBxawY= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1640035516; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Date:From:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Subject:To; bh=xIbwBFNy3bt2yzc9rgHFU2pVXQ9mHZioEMGDDMM6YgY=; b=DcyRK+jd/Be3+x/fvXnv5jWGMFu+ySaY/WEqjPBtuaqW1Eqn4aEj9puTPNKX8ActpwuiGjpkRl3CR+2vM7SVYl+qulaLNitHrFVrBqvtf3TidIpS7uW55IgbXvC2di9aKeafIlXadkWa6ap9PypIUDRwT+B3IexpR+N/9PiZVZo= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; dkim=pass header.i=elephly.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=rekado@elephly.net; dmarc=pass header.from= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1640035516; s=zoho; d=elephly.net; i=rekado@elephly.net; h=From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=xIbwBFNy3bt2yzc9rgHFU2pVXQ9mHZioEMGDDMM6YgY=; b=cSvmmhusJJIJ6kSr2f9y2LXKpc9lJC7xs+Mwu/TDCqMWdaChaZwjTmvp/Aop2h0y dtN7UmruJJIJTTeaP1hNxyc3Vsx3DEZtsctl/JTdHD6c5ds8PRw6nOmcRjoRHztQN3q YKf+f10E1tbpD6inQ1I4oRQ5vs1gBFmD8PAMFGh8= Received: from localhost (p54ad4ec1.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.173.78.193]) by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1640035513433995.1509856250896; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 13:25:13 -0800 (PST) User-agent: mu4e 1.6.10; emacs 27.2 From: Ricardo Wurmus Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2021 22:12:46 +0100 X-URL: https://elephly.net X-PGP-Key: https://elephly.net/rekado.pubkey X-PGP-Fingerprint: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6 2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC Message-ID: <87czlrnf4a.fsf@elephly.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-ZohoMailClient: External X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) My colleague extended the SAN slice to 5TB for more realistic testing. I formatted the disk with btrfs, and mounted it like this: mount /dev/sdd /mnt_test/ Then I ran the test with block size 512k: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- root@berlin ~# fio --randrepeat=3D1 --ioengine=3Dlibaio --direct=3D1 --gtod= _reduce=3D1 --name=3Dtest --filename=3D/mnt_test/test --bs=3D512k --iodepth= =3D64 --size=3D4G --readwrite=3Drandrw --rwmixread=3D75 test: (g=3D0): rw=3Drandrw, bs=3D(R) 512KiB-512KiB, (W) 512KiB-512KiB, (T) = 512KiB-512KiB, ioengine=3Dlibaio, iodepth=3D64 fio-3.6 Starting 1 process test: Laying out IO file (1 file / 4096MiB) Jobs: 1 (f=3D1): [m(1)][100.0%][r=3D802MiB/s,w=3D274MiB/s][r=3D1603,w=3D547= IOPS][eta 00m:00s] test: (groupid=3D0, jobs=3D1): err=3D 0: pid=3D16949: Mon Dec 20 22:18:28 2= 021 read: IOPS=3D1590, BW=3D795MiB/s (834MB/s)(3055MiB/3842msec) bw ( KiB/s): min=3D747520, max=3D857088, per=3D99.83%, avg=3D812763.43,= stdev=3D44213.07, samples=3D7 iops : min=3D 1460, max=3D 1674, avg=3D1587.43, stdev=3D86.35, sa= mples=3D7 write: IOPS=3D542, BW=3D271MiB/s (284MB/s)(1042MiB/3842msec) bw ( KiB/s): min=3D262144, max=3D297984, per=3D100.00%, avg=3D278820.57= , stdev=3D15115.88, samples=3D7 iops : min=3D 512, max=3D 582, avg=3D544.57, stdev=3D29.52, sam= ples=3D7 cpu : usr=3D1.98%, sys=3D96.28%, ctx=3D1096, majf=3D0, minf=3D6 IO depths : 1=3D0.1%, 2=3D0.1%, 4=3D0.1%, 8=3D0.1%, 16=3D0.2%, 32=3D0.= 4%, >=3D64=3D99.2% submit : 0=3D0.0%, 4=3D100.0%, 8=3D0.0%, 16=3D0.0%, 32=3D0.0%, 64= =3D0.0%, >=3D64=3D0.0% complete : 0=3D0.0%, 4=3D100.0%, 8=3D0.0%, 16=3D0.0%, 32=3D0.0%, 64= =3D0.1%, >=3D64=3D0.0% issued rwts: total=3D6109,2083,0,0 short=3D0,0,0,0 dropped=3D0,0,0,0 latency : target=3D0, window=3D0, percentile=3D100.00%, depth=3D64 Run status group 0 (all jobs): READ: bw=3D795MiB/s (834MB/s), 795MiB/s-795MiB/s (834MB/s-834MB/s), io= =3D3055MiB (3203MB), run=3D3842-3842msec WRITE: bw=3D271MiB/s (284MB/s), 271MiB/s-271MiB/s (284MB/s-284MB/s), io= =3D1042MiB (1092MB), run=3D3842-3842msec --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- Because this is fun I reran it with the same arguments: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- root@berlin ~# fio --randrepeat=3D1 --ioengine=3Dlibaio --direct=3D1 --gtod= _reduce=3D1 --name=3Dtest --filename=3D/mnt_test/test --bs=3D512k --iodepth= =3D64 --size=3D4G --readwrite=3Drandrw --rwmixread=3D75 test: (g=3D0): rw=3Drandrw, bs=3D(R) 512KiB-512KiB, (W) 512KiB-512KiB, (T) = 512KiB-512KiB, ioengine=3Dlibaio, iodepth=3D64 fio-3.6 Starting 1 process Jobs: 1 (f=3D0): [f(1)][-.-%][r=3D756MiB/s,w=3D260MiB/s][r=3D1511,w=3D519 I= OPS][eta 00m:00s] test: (groupid=3D0, jobs=3D1): err=3D 0: pid=3D17488: Mon Dec 20 22:18:56 2= 021 read: IOPS=3D1647, BW=3D824MiB/s (864MB/s)(3055MiB/3708msec) bw ( KiB/s): min=3D738304, max=3D929792, per=3D99.28%, avg=3D837485.71,= stdev=3D73710.05, samples=3D7 iops : min=3D 1442, max=3D 1816, avg=3D1635.71, stdev=3D143.96, s= amples=3D7 write: IOPS=3D561, BW=3D281MiB/s (295MB/s)(1042MiB/3708msec) bw ( KiB/s): min=3D234496, max=3D320512, per=3D99.79%, avg=3D287012.57,= stdev=3D29009.60, samples=3D7 iops : min=3D 458, max=3D 626, avg=3D560.57, stdev=3D56.66, sam= ples=3D7 cpu : usr=3D1.38%, sys=3D96.47%, ctx=3D1394, majf=3D0, minf=3D16= 420 IO depths : 1=3D0.1%, 2=3D0.1%, 4=3D0.1%, 8=3D0.1%, 16=3D0.2%, 32=3D0.= 4%, >=3D64=3D99.2% submit : 0=3D0.0%, 4=3D100.0%, 8=3D0.0%, 16=3D0.0%, 32=3D0.0%, 64= =3D0.0%, >=3D64=3D0.0% complete : 0=3D0.0%, 4=3D100.0%, 8=3D0.0%, 16=3D0.0%, 32=3D0.0%, 64= =3D0.1%, >=3D64=3D0.0% issued rwts: total=3D6109,2083,0,0 short=3D0,0,0,0 dropped=3D0,0,0,0 latency : target=3D0, window=3D0, percentile=3D100.00%, depth=3D64 Run status group 0 (all jobs): READ: bw=3D824MiB/s (864MB/s), 824MiB/s-824MiB/s (864MB/s-864MB/s), io= =3D3055MiB (3203MB), run=3D3708-3708msec WRITE: bw=3D281MiB/s (295MB/s), 281MiB/s-281MiB/s (295MB/s-295MB/s), io= =3D1042MiB (1092MB), run=3D3708-3708msec --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- Then I mounted with compression and space cache: mount /dev/sdd -o compress-force=3Dzstd,space_cache=3Dv2 /mnt_test/ The numbers don=E2=80=99t differ much at all. --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- Run status group 0 (all jobs): READ: bw=3D882MiB/s (925MB/s), 882MiB/s-882MiB/s (925MB/s-925MB/s), io= =3D3055MiB (3203MB), run=3D3464-3464msec WRITE: bw=3D301MiB/s (315MB/s), 301MiB/s-301MiB/s (315MB/s-315MB/s), io= =3D1042MiB (1092MB), run=3D3464-3464msec --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- I then erased the file system and again put on a big ext4: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- root@berlin ~# fio --randrepeat=3D1 --ioengine=3Dlibaio --direct=3D1 --gtod= _reduce=3D1 --name=3Dtest --filename=3D/mnt_test/test --bs=3D512k --iodepth= =3D64 --size=3D4G --readwrite=3Drandrw --rwmixread=3D75 test: (g=3D0): rw=3Drandrw, bs=3D(R) 512KiB-512KiB, (W) 512KiB-512KiB, (T) = 512KiB-512KiB, ioengine=3Dlibaio, iodepth=3D64 fio-3.6 Starting 1 process test: Laying out IO file (1 file / 4096MiB) Jobs: 1 (f=3D1): [m(1)][-.-%][r=3D1539MiB/s,w=3D526MiB/s][r=3D3078,w=3D1052= IOPS][eta 00m:00s] test: (groupid=3D0, jobs=3D1): err=3D 0: pid=3D20672: Mon Dec 20 22:23:29 2= 021 read: IOPS=3D3077, BW=3D1539MiB/s (1614MB/s)(3055MiB/1985msec) bw ( MiB/s): min=3D 1530, max=3D 1548, per=3D100.00%, avg=3D1539.33, st= dev=3D 9.02, samples=3D3 iops : min=3D 3060, max=3D 3096, avg=3D3078.67, stdev=3D18.04, sa= mples=3D3 write: IOPS=3D1049, BW=3D525MiB/s (550MB/s)(1042MiB/1985msec) bw ( KiB/s): min=3D533504, max=3D557056, per=3D100.00%, avg=3D546133.33= , stdev=3D11868.39, samples=3D3 iops : min=3D 1042, max=3D 1088, avg=3D1066.67, stdev=3D23.18, sa= mples=3D3 cpu : usr=3D2.17%, sys=3D11.24%, ctx=3D4787, majf=3D0, minf=3D8 IO depths : 1=3D0.1%, 2=3D0.1%, 4=3D0.1%, 8=3D0.1%, 16=3D0.2%, 32=3D0.= 4%, >=3D64=3D99.2% submit : 0=3D0.0%, 4=3D100.0%, 8=3D0.0%, 16=3D0.0%, 32=3D0.0%, 64= =3D0.0%, >=3D64=3D0.0% complete : 0=3D0.0%, 4=3D100.0%, 8=3D0.0%, 16=3D0.0%, 32=3D0.0%, 64= =3D0.1%, >=3D64=3D0.0% issued rwts: total=3D6109,2083,0,0 short=3D0,0,0,0 dropped=3D0,0,0,0 latency : target=3D0, window=3D0, percentile=3D100.00%, depth=3D64 Run status group 0 (all jobs): READ: bw=3D1539MiB/s (1614MB/s), 1539MiB/s-1539MiB/s (1614MB/s-1614MB/s)= , io=3D3055MiB (3203MB), run=3D1985-1985msec WRITE: bw=3D525MiB/s (550MB/s), 525MiB/s-525MiB/s (550MB/s-550MB/s), io= =3D1042MiB (1092MB), run=3D1985-1985msec Disk stats (read/write): sdd: ios=3D5926/2087, merge=3D1/0, ticks=3D119183/3276, in_queue=3D122460= , util=3D94.87% --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- No idea why btrfs performs so much worse in comparison. I=E2=80=99ll copy over /gnu/store/trash next. --=20 Ricardo From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: Disk performance on ci.guix.gnu.org Resent-From: Mathieu Othacehe Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2021 21:54:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Ricardo Wurmus Cc: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.164003724130380 (code B ref 51787); Mon, 20 Dec 2021 21:54:01 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Dec 2021 21:54:01 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51634 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mzQbY-0007ts-Rv for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 16:54:01 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:60982) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mzQbS-0007tX-9s for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 16:53:59 -0500 Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=55258 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mzQbM-0005ik-QZ; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 16:53:48 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:To: From; bh=uTgwFC3wdEK6Obpgdn4wflDZoTIA19yh2eJfX+NHy/g=; b=BM28vqNDzd71YYXEtssX bABIGjr8gtvsckskOehLOUhXVajeSojnYi2F3Hiv/jslfNn9C97XdYcU3+4zK/t3FsGrlSL5Rz9C7 cjc7k9j/hvgqnCCYT/kSaPDzryh9MKrPHOtnpQmtEf0BVWN8GdjTzgRoJWUwvfArqjg6FYpDqCvR6 jVlNRISLBu/RvztBA/1d7kd887+fuopRzsDw6DjNKedFPSBu60ffM6vC7xdEE9IEfm1Y/dzrSMnmY ffLVNQlJ1+TJBA0hs9+hNBDYenrd0GqNNeN+JeAbYgz3Vlcfkz9UxdLaQJOoVIST996FJ6Ak+bxLC Ex73s/lZeOruTg==; Received: from [2a01:cb18:832e:5f00:3563:417e:2a38:86d8] (port=49154 helo=meije) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mzQbM-00036T-2H; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 16:53:49 -0500 From: Mathieu Othacehe References: <875yrjpi1y.fsf@elephly.net> <87o85bjjpm.fsf@gnu.org> <871r27p5jq.fsf@elephly.net> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2021 22:53:45 +0100 In-Reply-To: <871r27p5jq.fsf@elephly.net> (Ricardo Wurmus's message of "Mon, 20 Dec 2021 18:05:08 +0100") Message-ID: <87a6gv3pue.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hey, > Do you mean time the copy or time the removal from that storage? You > know what, I=E2=80=99ll time both. I=E2=80=99ll need to get more space f= irst. I think > the trash directory is larger than the 500G that I got for testing the > SAN. Yeah I meant removal time :) I found this article[1] that suggests that over time the ext4 fragmentation can cause a performance drop that is very noticeable on hard drives. I'm trying to determine how fragmented is the sdb1 file-system, by running e4defrag and e2freefrag[2], but I'm not sure if they will complete soon. Copying and removing /gnu/store/trash on the SAN will be interesting but the ultimate test would be to be able to re-create the ext4 file-system directly on Berlin's sdb drive to evaluate the fragmentation role in this funny business. Thanks, Mathieu [1]: https://www.usenix.org/system/files/hotstorage19-paper-conway.pdf [2]: https://cromwell-intl.com/open-source/performance-tuning/file-systems.= html From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: Disk performance on ci.guix.gnu.org Resent-From: Ricardo Wurmus Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2021 17:37:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Mathieu Othacehe Cc: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.164010820321995 (code B ref 51787); Tue, 21 Dec 2021 17:37:02 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Dec 2021 17:36:43 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55472 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mzj46-0005ig-Pu for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 12:36:43 -0500 Received: from sender3-of-o51.zoho.com ([136.143.184.51]:21738) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mzj45-0005iU-Ii for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 12:36:42 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1640108191; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=JDqgyzsAypaq9CMTlFtILwmZ30LLNHb20sJHGPab7Qpu8Lm2oJGc1P6t4XAQD8XieoJQz5IbvAJ4ra9mbRWHlfLAc17K0yX/zdZ3E7vLIT3s8/FEATEhU0L8SLuWA0sS5yFP5TiZ0yzsB8B9rK9u0K/mT77OWw9MqsJzvo1NXa4= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1640108191; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:From:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Message-ID:References:Subject:To; bh=jH1Dkp4lD2bICXPSZf+fwlKJ828YTBcl8g3NEzCp1q0=; b=jgubDGrk5DkNle81PDiUxbQWfJIlvJltupTNvAmnlkQgFsokvBECnmfHStkhdInNuVuwGahATwHwKXyDzPx1qcoRYcUX5Gy/AUFelDAr4brQlWL0hSg/yRiF+HKaCIlF1CFqlD2Ks+k5OL8wxb9eYIaeiL/IXZ9Z+0NCeCIv/3o= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; dkim=pass header.i=elephly.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=rekado@elephly.net; dmarc=pass header.from= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1640108191; s=zoho; d=elephly.net; i=rekado@elephly.net; h=References:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-reply-to:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=jH1Dkp4lD2bICXPSZf+fwlKJ828YTBcl8g3NEzCp1q0=; b=B+2PHfRBTtb7URbYVoHkYqVeXfSCxvGJp1UKt7NnuF2OPkf8lUsghJMJ20LWuHRk KawcQHxr8i0me0yjKWZLU8IwP4XKCQoLTvwS9ZZVXWAAjr3loVYejWlLsXK5P5OEIcs m0BWehO2IRsSIoZ5aYm3+4cs3pjqtNR+hgnlfKOE= Received: from localhost (p54ad4c64.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.173.76.100]) by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1640108187448384.47795051636797; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 09:36:27 -0800 (PST) References: <875yrjpi1y.fsf@elephly.net> <87o85bjjpm.fsf@gnu.org> <871r27p5jq.fsf@elephly.net> <87a6gv3pue.fsf@gnu.org> User-agent: mu4e 1.6.10; emacs 27.2 From: Ricardo Wurmus Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2021 18:26:03 +0100 In-reply-to: <87a6gv3pue.fsf@gnu.org> X-URL: https://elephly.net X-PGP-Key: https://elephly.net/rekado.pubkey X-PGP-Fingerprint: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6 2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC Message-ID: <87v8zhn9m1.fsf@elephly.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-ZohoMailClient: External X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Today we discovered a few more things and discussed them on IRC. Here=E2= =80=99s a summary. /var/cache sits on the same storage as /gnu. We mounted the 5TB ext4 file system that=E2=80=99s hosted by the SAN at /mnt_test and started copyi= ng over /var/cache to /mnt_test/var/cache. Transfer speed was considerably faster (not *great*, but reasonably fast) than the copy of /gnu/store/trash to the same target. This confirmed our suspicions that the problem is not with the storage array but due to the fact that /gnu/store/trash (and also /gnu/store) is an extremely large, flat directory. /var/cache is not. Here=E2=80=99s what we do now: continue copying /var/cache to the SAN, then remount to serve substitutes from there. This removes some pressure from the file system as it will only be used for /gnu. We=E2=80=99re considering to dump the file system completely (i.e. reinstall the server), thereby emptying /gnu, but leaving the stash of built substitutes in /var/cache (hosted from the faster SAN). We could take this opportunity to reformat /gnu with btrfs, which performs quite a bit more poorly than ext4 but would be immune to defragmentation. It=E2=80=99s not clear that defragmentation matters here.= It could just be that the problem is exclusively caused by having these incredibly large, flat /gnu/store, /gnu/store/.links, and /gnu/store/trash directories. A possible alternative for this file system might also be XFS, which performs well when presented with unreasonably large directories. It may be a good idea to come up with realistic test scenarios that we could test with each of these three file systems at scale. Any ideas? --=20 Ricardo From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: Disk performance on ci.guix.gnu.org Resent-From: Leo Famulari Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2021 17:52:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Ricardo Wurmus Cc: Mathieu Othacehe , 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.164010910623923 (code B ref 51787); Tue, 21 Dec 2021 17:52:01 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Dec 2021 17:51:46 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55522 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mzjIg-0006Dn-5a for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 12:51:46 -0500 Received: from wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com ([64.147.123.19]:53019) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mzjId-0006DR-Qv for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 12:51:44 -0500 Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id B924632007D7; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 12:51:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 21 Dec 2021 12:51:38 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=famulari.name; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; s=mesmtp; bh=wpL1pBUfY4TyiCiU1BIcLzNCyFxMarIjym3Zp3IJZ80=; b=nizKUSfVlrEA lbtZ1a/QXvfgUvb89GY5Ya983slBHa8e8neN9Ew/rNZqaTj4wLwrLSQGE9Z5FKpz CXOvfZcDb124sMyCMzpWppq9XL0Ore7ncZdf1uThcsbSXhVIrvWruaR5j+At1B8q drr1DkltXItBPRKvdv1k4O+s5l7UEfo= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=wpL1pBUfY4TyiCiU1BIcLzNCyFxMarIjym3Zp3IJZ 80=; b=Y7rEEaQKUiFRA6D5H823eLLUgl7AQMdT+WBuKFTaGpSAM54jhar53X4Zo raWui/XzT0FfzY9sMUH+Z0v/KP7zQq2CR9cZE1XPcefgQR3WBWKqjCGwOt/yGdXx XhULH1OhdhGUVB1GazlCsJGTsrit2Uk1gjRd65fcK3ErRfnXv/iUdVJKltV8xmLs 3O89ICPgaz3ldskNYGaRoYFbtlwz5vSNM7uflkhzIWsQE3l1xjl6P8FH4Fi52DKt qu44e4+w/gIhjUDO6FcsGTDlA3HSMFsaPzxgfdJyaNuC6LiVjo29QHggKnryNjGI xgxJtRs3NDXvh+n5JCFY/hg5DheNw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvuddruddtgedguddtjecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpeffhffvuffkfhggtggugfgjsehtkeertddttdejnecuhfhrohhmpefnvgho ucfhrghmuhhlrghrihcuoehlvghosehfrghmuhhlrghrihdrnhgrmhgvqeenucggtffrrg htthgvrhhnpefgudffteettdekkeduhffgfefgieefgeeuieetudejffelieduueeifffg udfgudenucffohhmrghinhepghhnuhdrohhrghenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtne curfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehlvghosehfrghmuhhlrghrihdrnhgrmhgv X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 12:51:36 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2021 12:51:35 -0500 From: Leo Famulari Message-ID: References: <875yrjpi1y.fsf@elephly.net> <87o85bjjpm.fsf@gnu.org> <871r27p5jq.fsf@elephly.net> <87a6gv3pue.fsf@gnu.org> <87v8zhn9m1.fsf@elephly.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <87v8zhn9m1.fsf@elephly.net> X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 06:26:03PM +0100, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: > We could take this opportunity to reformat /gnu with btrfs, which > performs quite a bit more poorly than ext4 but would be immune to > defragmentation. It’s not clear that defragmentation matters here. It > could just be that the problem is exclusively caused by having these > incredibly large, flat /gnu/store, /gnu/store/.links, and > /gnu/store/trash directories. My impression was that btrfs could also become fragmented. At least, btrfs-progrs includes a command for defragmenting. Or do I misunderstand? From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: Disk performance on ci.guix.gnu.org Resent-From: Mathieu Othacehe Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2021 18:24:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Ricardo Wurmus Cc: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.16401110193425 (code B ref 51787); Tue, 21 Dec 2021 18:24:01 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Dec 2021 18:23:39 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55622 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mzjnX-0000tA-7z for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 13:23:39 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:48536) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mzjnV-0000sy-4e for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 13:23:37 -0500 Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=60754 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mzjnP-0003PP-J4; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 13:23:31 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:To: From; bh=C3dpeCCzYZiMUrYrYhZD0PYoQTvAt6/iG4SGGStFGsg=; b=IidPS+yIsd+MnOw2IzaI AUn+CyJG/DbN48PYDbxRHi/2L0B4clI1BQ/+g66VrIo65fabUsnp79AucanNriMn+d5b0jKOrPqLI okCWnTDDm5Je9hVRgPqIRUS/K/LYL39bbZJIa4mUiNQ5IVr4lAPGjmZ4XwQKpOMLlE3NRyZqCGPsy y6MN7BUNWUqBLSkQdglVRq+seqGFR08mv8vJm2x4qzcQXFfVRmtdZnhhYuCfS87NGVS2LkYe2mgWD DcJA9cH4QgOl6fWNtl2O/EOzz11xcXFKHXPvKXrF9jJfgKHBuf1qcvDjhjXkZcUW5MeqJUJ9E6qjx P/lI4D8M/7hMIA==; Received: from [2a01:cb18:832e:5f00:3563:417e:2a38:86d8] (port=49210 helo=meije) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mzjnP-0005LD-GZ; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 13:23:31 -0500 From: Mathieu Othacehe References: <875yrjpi1y.fsf@elephly.net> <87o85bjjpm.fsf@gnu.org> <871r27p5jq.fsf@elephly.net> <87a6gv3pue.fsf@gnu.org> <87v8zhn9m1.fsf@elephly.net> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2021 19:23:28 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87v8zhn9m1.fsf@elephly.net> (Ricardo Wurmus's message of "Tue, 21 Dec 2021 18:26:03 +0100") Message-ID: <874k71g6lb.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hey, > Today we discovered a few more things and discussed them on IRC. Here=E2= =80=99s > a summary. Nice summary :) > We could take this opportunity to reformat /gnu with btrfs, which > performs quite a bit more poorly than ext4 but would be immune to > defragmentation. It=E2=80=99s not clear that defragmentation matters her= e. It > could just be that the problem is exclusively caused by having these > incredibly large, flat /gnu/store, /gnu/store/.links, and > /gnu/store/trash directories. > > A possible alternative for this file system might also be XFS, which > performs well when presented with unreasonably large directories. > > It may be a good idea to come up with realistic test scenarios that we > could test with each of these three file systems at scale. We could compare xfs, btrfs and ext4 performances on a store subset, 1TiB for instance that we would create on the SAN. Realistic test scenario could be: - Time the copy of new items to the test store. - Time the removal of randomly picked items from the test store. - Time the creation of nar archives from the test store. That will allow us to choose the file-system that has the best performances for our use-case, regardless of fragmentation. Now fragmentation may or may not be a problem as you mentioned. What we could do is repeat the same tests but on a test store that is created and removed N times, to simulate file-system aging. This is more or less what is done in this article[1] by "git pulling" N times a repository and testing read performances. For them btrfs > xfs > ext4 in term of performances, but we might draw different conclusions for our specific use case. Do you think it is realistic? If so, we can start working on some test scripts. Thanks, Mathieu [1]: https://www.usenix.org/system/files/hotstorage19-paper-conway.pdf From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: Disk performance on ci.guix.gnu.org Resent-From: Bengt Richter Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2021 23:21:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Ricardo Wurmus Cc: Mathieu Othacehe , 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Reply-To: Bengt Richter Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.164012884410471 (code B ref 51787); Tue, 21 Dec 2021 23:21:01 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Dec 2021 23:20:44 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56160 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mzoR2-0002io-2r for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 18:20:44 -0500 Received: from imta-36.everyone.net ([216.200.145.36]:51576 helo=imta-38.everyone.net) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mzoQz-0002ic-Hr for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 18:20:42 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (omta002.sj2.proofpoint.com [127.0.0.1]) by imta-38.everyone.net (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 1BLNItAo029320; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 15:20:39 -0800 X-Eon-Originating-Account: i9_lel_50rLmNMFnfTwMF5dgksd13XQGCXzUboYiffs X-Eon-Dm: m0117124.ppops.net Received: by m0117124.mta.everyone.net (EON-AUTHRELAY2 - 53b92f98) id m0117124.6195d1ae.28b54c; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 15:20:37 -0800 X-Eon-Sig: AQMHrIJhwmFFNJJjkwIAAAAD,9402e946dd9158a37aa9c87c691908ec X-Eip: pK5W_qA8Izdfz3RPTY6r50YbJvK_DaTYHrb3kbvsItQ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 00:20:24 +0100 From: Bengt Richter Message-ID: <20211221232024.GA41746@LionPure> References: <875yrjpi1y.fsf@elephly.net> <87o85bjjpm.fsf@gnu.org> <871r27p5jq.fsf@elephly.net> <87a6gv3pue.fsf@gnu.org> <87v8zhn9m1.fsf@elephly.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <87v8zhn9m1.fsf@elephly.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Proofpoint-GUID: 3bv8ji_1oRleO6-mugcqY5_-fmQGCT6f X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: 3bv8ji_1oRleO6-mugcqY5_-fmQGCT6f X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.425, 18.0.790 definitions=2021-12-21_07:2021-12-21, 2021-12-21 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 impostorscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=804 mlxscore=0 malwarescore=0 clxscore=1034 priorityscore=1501 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2110150000 definitions=main-2112210116 X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.8 (/) Hi Ricardo, TL;DR: re: "Any ideas?" :) Read this [0], and consider how file systems may be interacting with with SSD wear-leveling algorithms. Are some file systems dependent on successful speculative transaction continuations, while others might slow down waiting for signs that an SSD controller has committed one of ITS transactions, e.g. in special cases where the user or kernel file system wants to be sure metadata is written/journaled for fs structural integrity, but maybe cares less about data? I guess this difference might show up in copying a large file over-writing the same target file (slower) vs copying to a series of new files (faster). What happens if you use a contiguous file as swap space? Or, if you use anonymous files as user data space buffers, passing them to wayland as file handles, per its protocol, can you do better than ignoring SSD controllers and/or storage hardware altogether? Reference [0] is from 2013, so probably much has happened since then, and the paper mentions (which has probably not gotten better), the following, referring to trade secrets giving one manufacturer ability to produce longer-lasting SSDs cheaper and better than others ... --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- This means that the SSD controller is dedicated to a single brand of NAND, and it means that the SSD maker can’t shop around among NAND suppliers for the best price. Furthermore, the NAND supplier won’t share this information unless it believes that there is some compelling reason to work the SSD manufacturer. Since there are hundreds of SSD makers it’s really difficult to get these companies to pay attention to you! The SSD manufacturers that have this kind of relationship with their flash suppliers are very rare and very special. --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- Well, maybe you will have to parameterize your file system tuning with manufacturer ID and SSD controller firmware version ;/ Mvh, Bengt [0] https://www.snia.org/sites/default/files/SSSITECHNOTES_HowControllersMaximizeSSDLife.pdf On +2021-12-21 18:26:03 +0100, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: > Today we discovered a few more things and discussed them on IRC. Here’s > a summary. > > /var/cache sits on the same storage as /gnu. We mounted the 5TB ext4 > file system that’s hosted by the SAN at /mnt_test and started copying > over /var/cache to /mnt_test/var/cache. Transfer speed was considerably > faster (not *great*, but reasonably fast) than the copy of > /gnu/store/trash to the same target. > > This confirmed our suspicions that the problem is not with the storage > array but due to the fact that /gnu/store/trash (and also /gnu/store) > is an extremely large, flat directory. /var/cache is not. > > Here’s what we do now: continue copying /var/cache to the SAN, then > remount to serve substitutes from there. This removes some pressure > from the file system as it will only be used for /gnu. We’re > considering to dump the file system completely (i.e. reinstall the > server), thereby emptying /gnu, but leaving the stash of built > substitutes in /var/cache (hosted from the faster SAN). > > We could take this opportunity to reformat /gnu with btrfs, which > performs quite a bit more poorly than ext4 but would be immune to > defragmentation. It’s not clear that defragmentation matters here. It > could just be that the problem is exclusively caused by having these > incredibly large, flat /gnu/store, /gnu/store/.links, and > /gnu/store/trash directories. > > A possible alternative for this file system might also be XFS, which > performs well when presented with unreasonably large directories. > > It may be a good idea to come up with realistic test scenarios that we > could test with each of these three file systems at scale. > > Any ideas? > > -- > Ricardo > > > (sorry, the top-post grew) -- Regards, Bengt Richter From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: Disk performance on ci.guix.gnu.org Resent-From: Thiago Jung Bauermann Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 01:35:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Cc: Ricardo Wurmus , Mathieu Othacehe , Bengt Richter , Leo Famulari Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.164013687431573 (code B ref 51787); Wed, 22 Dec 2021 01:35:02 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Dec 2021 01:34:34 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56282 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mzqWY-0008DB-AA for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 20:34:34 -0500 Received: from mx.kolabnow.com ([212.103.80.153]:24362) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mzqWV-0008Cr-UY for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 20:34:32 -0500 Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by mx.kolabnow.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7888410ED; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 02:34:25 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: ext-mx-out003.mykolab.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (4096-bit key) reason="pass (just generated, assumed good)" header.d=kolabnow.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kolabnow.com; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:mime-version :message-id:in-reply-to:date:date:subject:subject:from:from :references:received:received:received; s=dkim20160331; t= 1640136863; x=1641951264; bh=3i63tiFp+CoNc/GuP9QPl1lU2yVYTFDvyF2 sJxmBOu0=; b=y6lWu7Pkj1WxW9gmZFp0PWS5LXAjz9+gnSFUifbB8n0eaGZuMIU S2MwHeis1SdzMI9j8rcS7hV39ZyjFo9J4FHLq5fN1xQ2E8fuSBEUYKjEFLx4/1d4 IVMx++PCYa4fHPhGp9g3OXJe7gDxaymob7V+89dnE/9BH7+ZdmOyKtlRFIMIFfT+ /0JLAudAG91n30PXfeSznSDt3F8A5XaYxCvW0ROcjP9DqkgTGM9nG6QvMjJ3um6h UiglYVFnx87HF85A9BUZrFHRroC+Fj98TBhZqgxDMFFTMiOXzwKPTQaQTCscWNfI xOFoHt3rvoUuooYNGG80vx7Qes2wwdRurU6egwHB9VXw9F/O/nNmdv1ne3IIRJZV vkxI0nxNPHFIwxla1Ky5On7U9MlaG38Qy6p8GG3uOOAA4qk/kArGBytOezn71yby E0B7iH3Fqnv7FGKlhHikR4zkVbfoknO4ZOdHlnlVfLI2CrcAW4hTGLDzmaIa+on3 fMA3QTpeOE0Ar807JaKpzU1wVq4iabbq+BqRf4lBk/lOd6s3gONxwKL7UzKfh5M0 dh+J1QpT4gec+vHONtawFuR+BsWDoBotVUnchApK1jL/Ja28pTtLCbRN3ACqi8hT cag4fUmeuCcjU31/7S8q2R2FZLWqqMrXE9kaR1IgoqwPL4vLvknfVtmg= X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mykolab.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mx.kolabnow.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (ext-mx-out003.mykolab.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HB6ko0HtvW3e; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 02:34:23 +0100 (CET) Received: from int-mx001.mykolab.com (unknown [10.9.13.1]) by mx.kolabnow.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 56A15408FC; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 02:34:22 +0100 (CET) Received: from ext-subm003.mykolab.com (unknown [10.9.6.3]) by int-mx001.mykolab.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D796921AC; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 02:34:20 +0100 (CET) References: <875yrjpi1y.fsf@elephly.net> <87o85bjjpm.fsf@gnu.org> <871r27p5jq.fsf@elephly.net> <87a6gv3pue.fsf@gnu.org> <87v8zhn9m1.fsf@elephly.net> From: Thiago Jung Bauermann Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2021 21:27:46 -0300 In-reply-to: <87v8zhn9m1.fsf@elephly.net> Message-ID: <87lf0dzalt.fsf@kolabnow.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hello, Ricardo Wurmus writes: > Today we discovered a few more things and discussed them on IRC. Here=E2= =80=99s > a summary. > > /var/cache sits on the same storage as /gnu. We mounted the 5TB ext4 > file system that=E2=80=99s hosted by the SAN at /mnt_test and started cop= ying > over /var/cache to /mnt_test/var/cache. Transfer speed was considerably > faster (not *great*, but reasonably fast) than the copy of > /gnu/store/trash to the same target. > > This confirmed our suspicions that the problem is not with the storage > array but due to the fact that /gnu/store/trash (and also /gnu/store) > is an extremely large, flat directory. /var/cache is not. There was an interesting thread in the Linux kernel mailing lists about this very issue earlier this year: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/206078.1621264018@warthog.procyon.org= .uk/ I=E2=80=99m not sure I completely understood all of the concerns discussed = there, but my understanding of it is that for workloads which don=E2=80=99t concurrent= ly modify the huge directory, it=E2=80=99s size isn=E2=80=99t a problem for btrfs and= XFS and in fact it=E2=80=99s even more efficient to have one big directory rather than subdirectories=C2=B9. It=E2=80=99s should also be well handled even by ext4= , IIUC=C2=B2. The problem for all filesystems is concurrently modifying the directory (e.g., adding or removing files), because the kernel serializes directory operations at the VFS layer. Also in that case XFS can also have allocation issues when adding new files if one isn=E2=80=99t careful.=C2=B3 --=20 Thanks Thiago =C2=B9 https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20210517232237.GE2893@dread.di= saster.area/ =C2=B2 https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/6E4DE257-4220-4B5B-B3D0-B67C7B= C69BB5@dilger.ca/ =C2=B3 https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20210519125743.GP2893@dread.di= saster.area/ From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: Disk performance on ci.guix.gnu.org Resent-From: Ricardo Wurmus Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2021 22:24:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Mathieu Othacehe Cc: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.164047100431476 (code B ref 51787); Sat, 25 Dec 2021 22:24:01 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Dec 2021 22:23:24 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40001 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1n1FRj-0008Bc-Px for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 25 Dec 2021 17:23:24 -0500 Received: from sender4-of-o52.zoho.com ([136.143.188.52]:21282) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1n1FRf-0008BQ-1o for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 25 Dec 2021 17:23:22 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1640470993; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=DT/OMetXxde1isvecV4fU0rPqKKa8PGLsESvTYC9p2uNHSSshHlBrUI4B0QqwO2gumLSI91S0DhJa/PCQm+KpKAB54VdexcT+3k8M2sZWn4cEOaQ39nduOQ6RcDguzVzTsbwXGZubjoXbmLhW4OBTheF3BE7bPoXpQbYNzm1cy8= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1640470993; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:From:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Message-ID:References:Subject:To; bh=VY+1RNnbRdxSzBwvgxcH39KfMkZE/8/MXaRN2E99tno=; b=PcgyoR8S2hrNYNLonDRGzJRpbPc0vOH6QkDQBGYkEyj+Ap5dX401xxaHrxCbLkHJNCqbSCkCCTQ111mNHzyoDSqLZUxIQV1csbH1RgdqfZOjYeRIB7Z9R7eRYBTwaedDcGKJEM37Ej82ZWTCNaxRQSAEWrnCjrQHkI0vPKOep2s= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; dkim=pass header.i=elephly.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=rekado@elephly.net; dmarc=pass header.from= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1640470993; s=zoho; d=elephly.net; i=rekado@elephly.net; h=References:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-reply-to:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=VY+1RNnbRdxSzBwvgxcH39KfMkZE/8/MXaRN2E99tno=; b=FJJldJl9Jcu0ZRzKjFwYTaZD8p6Y81JveYnmXIsbtI8MWqPh1u8IUDnMlN/CC4QL oRn8/pgHNl7rGQX3572P2Q+MhMrCLsotxpbLc5cDedePRPgecBoqnZSbZgEkUg6UuiH XeykWOSKAWLYum9UwzTNIteuNQ7qcfL7/lpyu6rk= Received: from localhost (p4fd5a901.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [79.213.169.1]) by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1640470990202742.1489485710027; Sat, 25 Dec 2021 14:23:10 -0800 (PST) References: <875yrjpi1y.fsf@elephly.net> <87o85bjjpm.fsf@gnu.org> <871r27p5jq.fsf@elephly.net> <87a6gv3pue.fsf@gnu.org> <87v8zhn9m1.fsf@elephly.net> User-agent: mu4e 1.6.10; emacs 27.2 From: Ricardo Wurmus Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2021 23:19:23 +0100 In-reply-to: <87v8zhn9m1.fsf@elephly.net> X-URL: https://elephly.net X-PGP-Key: https://elephly.net/rekado.pubkey X-PGP-Fingerprint: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6 2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC Message-ID: <87wnjsjpdh.fsf@elephly.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-ZohoMailClient: External X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Ricardo Wurmus writes: > Today we discovered a few more things and discussed them on IRC. Here=E2= =80=99s > a summary. > > /var/cache sits on the same storage as /gnu. We mounted the 5TB ext4 > file system that=E2=80=99s hosted by the SAN at /mnt_test and started cop= ying > over /var/cache to /mnt_test/var/cache. Transfer speed was considerably > faster (not *great*, but reasonably fast) than the copy of > /gnu/store/trash to the same target. Turns out that space on the SAN is insufficient for a full copy of /var/cache. We=E2=80=99ve hit ENOSPC after 4.2TB. The SAN enforces some headroom to remain free, so it denies us full access to the 5TB slice. Bummer. I guess we=E2=80=99ll have to wait for the SAN extension some time early 20= 22 before we can relocate the substitutes cache. Should we attempt to overwrite /gnu/store and rely exclusively on substitutes from the cache? No matter how we look at it, the huge store is a performance problem for us. Today I had to kill =E2=80=99guix gc=E2=80=99 after the GC lock had be= en held for about 24 hours. We will keep having this problem. --=20 Ricardo From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: Disk performance on ci.guix.gnu.org Resent-From: Mathieu Othacehe Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2021 08:54:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Ricardo Wurmus Cc: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.16405087995627 (code B ref 51787); Sun, 26 Dec 2021 08:54:02 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 26 Dec 2021 08:53:19 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40216 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1n1PHK-0001Sh-Mp for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 26 Dec 2021 03:53:18 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:56156) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1n1PHI-0001SR-MO for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 26 Dec 2021 03:53:17 -0500 Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=48226 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n1PHD-000751-Au; Sun, 26 Dec 2021 03:53:11 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:To: From; bh=qruqFTh365w/HmbbUfe8RZ4oL1e72/w0zHfi5j25Lco=; b=covgoMa76rHYf6VOpUXX ocjaeLg1/ukT+AjYxB6ZfrrKTW9yhDWfTNqj7LqWQtDVzmq6oB3cCBnYhhflWyZYMv9mFVbD9q54A K1H1wJBpZIGMmw77QHGmwdEW8kW04F4Kpbt/Ob+3HWEy3nHgIhVcnNDV+pgCRrvAHBR4iIZA2+lbi j9uEQKp0A5ReUT4Utn3+9zyoyZcLg/m9jWLqA4ErU5WpaOFJlwtbJHOlcr05ALFhwnWdmrQgASm98 JgwAl0y+5QGySleCFl/4j1tDUbv7yVLDQ15TI9E7T0oNEpxUQkRXYByWRezCgv7gPkz6C3YfKs51R OOlLx/Qeje2HpA==; Received: from [2a01:cb18:832e:5f00:3563:417e:2a38:86d8] (port=48388 helo=meije) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n1PHD-0006X9-AA; Sun, 26 Dec 2021 03:53:11 -0500 From: Mathieu Othacehe References: <875yrjpi1y.fsf@elephly.net> <87o85bjjpm.fsf@gnu.org> <871r27p5jq.fsf@elephly.net> <87a6gv3pue.fsf@gnu.org> <87v8zhn9m1.fsf@elephly.net> <87wnjsjpdh.fsf@elephly.net> Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2021 09:53:09 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87wnjsjpdh.fsf@elephly.net> (Ricardo Wurmus's message of "Sat, 25 Dec 2021 23:19:23 +0100") Message-ID: <87fsqfd9xm.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hello Ricardo, > Should we attempt to overwrite /gnu/store and rely exclusively on > substitutes from the cache? Yes, I don't see any other options. Before that, what might be nice could be: 1. Ensure that all Berlin /var/cache/guix/publish directory is synchronized on Bordeaux. We are now at 117G out of X. We could then start a publish server on Bordeaux. As Bordeaux is already part of the default substitute servers list, the transition could be smooth I guess. 2. Determine what file-system out of ext4, btrfs and xfs could be the most suitable for Berlin's /gnu/store. I'm running some tests on an old HDD to try to determine the fragmentation impact on those file-systems. We can of course choose to be conservative and go for ext4 that did the job until now. Regarding the /gnu/store re-creation, I wonder how can we do it without reinstalling completely Berlin. Maybe we could save the system store closure somewhere and restore it on the shining new file-system? Thanks, Mathieu From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#51787: Disk performance on ci.guix.gnu.org Resent-From: Ricardo Wurmus Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2021 10:52:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51787 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Mathieu Othacehe Cc: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 51787-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51787.16408614898565 (code B ref 51787); Thu, 30 Dec 2021 10:52:01 +0000 Received: (at 51787) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Dec 2021 10:51:29 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51490 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1n2t1s-0002E5-Kt for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 30 Dec 2021 05:51:28 -0500 Received: from sender3-of-o51.zoho.com ([136.143.184.51]:21190) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1n2t1q-0002Dx-7A for 51787@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 30 Dec 2021 05:51:27 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1640861479; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=gwPGqev3qu6m1/3FCeQg1Mj+gGvm/8ltXj+yOyh8bAdBtROHxfUjOO6yhktpk43b4VVxvKL5IyFVqWYA9ScyWZRsgHctk+TOaiBKlQRl7HB61iWXKRbtk/pP3H4tsd2ClNSs2WFZxlljF316yHuX5ZjJ6TflHX1I6fiiFUS+Ykk= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1640861479; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:From:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Message-ID:References:Subject:To; bh=I1qXWDnDytSB/eXEp3XZadeU6+Gn52FI6FDMfUWW0rM=; b=BGH9zcVaKIDi15jGSiEMKsrKX3e0Dml0Qyi7+I0OcQ/NyXY1lCIpIYnCbkjxAQAKnjnYP31Hmfdq9AekuWnCDVCDvH+c+SLqUI1WJ3YQqIfNcs00l6xG5PLGHcqkQ708ykyHnCcsO+hjGADKDpbEH0HruVvlsQXM6KLUeUX7Zko= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; dkim=pass header.i=elephly.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=rekado@elephly.net; dmarc=pass header.from= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1640861479; s=zoho; d=elephly.net; i=rekado@elephly.net; h=References:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-reply-to:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=I1qXWDnDytSB/eXEp3XZadeU6+Gn52FI6FDMfUWW0rM=; b=S1lDDHcmL35Q5bxzsx2vmZG4HmunQauar6FEHqwS7nDuD+AWeRLVOF+ECVuCWrwQ smve3hMEkkrylwVhu6GpkYWtgKGNNYFNLgtTFyRWAL9kqb0pFB7x+1vjVilk7Vlqj79 MDSTJq4kou4Ru8NDv9uatyTrWHiJx7WL8EcSV+UY= Received: from localhost (p54ad4d28.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.173.77.40]) by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1640861478017408.4799745377054; Thu, 30 Dec 2021 02:51:18 -0800 (PST) References: <875yrjpi1y.fsf@elephly.net> <87o85bjjpm.fsf@gnu.org> <871r27p5jq.fsf@elephly.net> <87a6gv3pue.fsf@gnu.org> <87v8zhn9m1.fsf@elephly.net> <87wnjsjpdh.fsf@elephly.net> <87fsqfd9xm.fsf@gnu.org> User-agent: mu4e 1.6.10; emacs 27.2 From: Ricardo Wurmus Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2021 11:44:12 +0100 In-reply-to: <87fsqfd9xm.fsf@gnu.org> X-URL: https://elephly.net X-PGP-Key: https://elephly.net/rekado.pubkey X-PGP-Fingerprint: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6 2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC Message-ID: <87wnjmgycd.fsf@elephly.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-ZohoMailClient: External X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Mathieu Othacehe writes: > Hello Ricardo, > >> Should we attempt to overwrite /gnu/store and rely exclusively on >> substitutes from the cache? > > Yes, I don't see any other options. Before that, what might be nice > could be: > > 1. Ensure that all Berlin /var/cache/guix/publish directory is > synchronized on Bordeaux. We are now at 117G out of X. We could then > start a publish server on Bordeaux. As Bordeaux is already part of the > default substitute servers list, the transition could be smooth I guess. I had the SAN slice extended from 5TB to 10TB. This is now also full (at 9.2TB due to SAN configuration). I suggest doing the rsync to Bordeaux from /mnt_test/var/cache/guix/publish instead of the much slower /var/cache/guix/publish. It doesn=E2=80=99t hold *all* files, but 9= +TB should be enough to fuel the transfer to Bordeaux for a while. > Regarding the /gnu/store re-creation, I wonder how can we do it without > reinstalling completely Berlin. Maybe we could save the system store > closure somewhere and restore it on the shining new file-system? I don=E2=80=99t know. I would want to take a copy of the root file system = as a backup of state (like the Lets Encrypt certs), and copy the closure of the current operating system configuration somewhere. We could copy it to a dedicated build node (after stopping the GC cron job) and set it up as an internal substitute server. Then =E2=80=9Cguix system init=E2=80=9D = while fetching the substitutes from that server. But I guess we=E2=80=99d have to boot the installer image anyway so that we= can safely erase /gnu/store, or else we=E2=80=99d erase files that are currentl= y in use. --=20 Ricardo From unknown Sat Jun 14 18:41:40 2025 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.505 (Entity 5.505) X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org From: help-debbugs@gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System) To: Mathieu Othacehe Subject: bug#51787: closed (Re: bug#51787: GC takes more than 9 hours on berlin) Message-ID: References: <87350jjm26.fsf@gmail.com> <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> X-Gnu-PR-Message: they-closed 51787 X-Gnu-PR-Package: guix Reply-To: 51787@debbugs.gnu.org Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2023 10:54:02 +0000 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----------=_1692183242-2099-1" This is a multi-part message in MIME format... ------------=_1692183242-2099-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Your bug report #51787: GC takes more than 9 hours on berlin which was filed against the guix package, has been closed. The explanation is attached below, along with your original report. If you require more details, please reply to 51787@debbugs.gnu.org. --=20 51787: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=3D51787 GNU Bug Tracking System Contact help-debbugs@gnu.org with problems ------------=_1692183242-2099-1 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received: (at 51787-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Aug 2023 10:53:15 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38937 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qWE9L-0000Wp-BI for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 06:53:15 -0400 Received: from mail-qk1-x733.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::733]:50394) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qWE9J-0000Wc-TW for 51787-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 06:53:14 -0400 Received: by mail-qk1-x733.google.com with SMTP id af79cd13be357-765a7768f1dso513340185a.0 for <51787-done@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 03:53:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1692183188; x=1692787988; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:in-reply-to:date:references :subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=c1BFXtlv6jSEdIULLoyIJEHYXclrHIVQdENur/ZZ50g=; b=JZ0qX2YExg7eltcMSOvjcgVC+6KLbi0/IJnI4F5YqlLTTLpEueTApU14UzcBiV9B0A 7mJZr7ZV3SQ6lmn1BL8CTbQ2pkebfEbYDx91bVW2tP+2bxOdz0vmyztG6qpTiWfCRpjj WoZ8NvAx4OsFDLqlquOOiCa42K4WrzmJ4dGT07AIclb7/Gve7uWr+2T7qfW8shlqdiBw bRW8qXcfUZNC5Jl+bX00GLQUAixskbkpoLiTrIDr1Z8/kBCQbga/rwp3zxB0kLwRdGwK m1A9XCRKQdrPKYJ3DoNKbxkezSywrM4lDVymLVL89GeJQwyYurFwxIqYzS1Ia2v334IG JUPw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1692183188; x=1692787988; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:in-reply-to:date:references :subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=c1BFXtlv6jSEdIULLoyIJEHYXclrHIVQdENur/ZZ50g=; b=kUqYpVodGwJEIQ3AtlhvyFIrMLUMc3wGfqOV+1ndRsu/cOm9ESIyZ8vjzf8pIje8yE NtmR70jhKpBsk8B2FHJmfEhx4PRk1uYHh/1K0NoabiPBvoeEojs8hThZeqmnuc5SH7GK GuPAb2czIFNGNd7e1GdDqGSXc3Bt3/jD+BU1CxZOETNi4JBD2YS98xOX+SwI04NI+3nj cAMzpNVNEIknFFDr/tH+YjzEeJLs202Rm6EmFqgmZe4l4BjSzOPMyjLa6tpRxsecnO7d sFZkz1MWZ1CwJwTV4hyHxmeFgy/9vcXHNkZL85VboSi56fU+UrlH/NVTxLGoCoF+lGV2 HwzQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwflSyVRABRekvFMpuJpll9/u3jLb+gxlO1MzF8NSr6xe8OEuJG uaR3ck12lLBUzWQa6hBV/d7oRVDpCq8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHFupaY9OfQ2lh1Zpt/9BCWoeAbBcg6co9NSFjCosWT0Av+uCKm9jOniTC/pL1VxK7oSOrPwQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:4108:b0:76c:8f86:49de with SMTP id j8-20020a05620a410800b0076c8f8649demr2050695qko.16.1692183188010; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 03:53:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hurd (dsl-152-182.b2b2c.ca. [66.158.152.182]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j7-20020a37c247000000b0076730d0b0b9sm4330338qkm.14.2023.08.16.03.53.06 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 16 Aug 2023 03:53:07 -0700 (PDT) From: Maxim Cournoyer To: Mathieu Othacehe Subject: Re: bug#51787: GC takes more than 9 hours on berlin References: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2023 06:53:05 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> (Mathieu Othacehe's message of "Fri, 12 Nov 2021 11:49:04 +0000") Message-ID: <87350jjm26.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 51787-done Cc: 51787-done@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hi, Mathieu Othacehe writes: > Hello, > > On berlin, the daily GC command is still running whereas it was started > 9 hours ago. > > guix processes > [...] > SessionPID: 37231 > ClientPID: 37195 > ClientCommand: /gnu/store/49vfv8l1j96bbd73ssbqanpnjz83arss-guix-1.3.0-11.014f1b6/libexec/guix/guile \ /gnu/store/49vfv8l1j96bbd73ssbqanpnjz83arss-guix-1.3.0-11.014f1b6/bin/guix gc -F10995116277760 > > > and > > mathieu@berlin ~$ ps auxww|grep 37195 > root 37195 0.0 0.0 183260 33440 ? Sl 03:59 0:00 /gnu/store/49vfv8l1j96bbd73ssbqanpnjz83arss-guix-1.3.0-11.014f1b6/libexec/guix/guile \ /gnu/store/49vfv8l1j96bbd73ssbqanpnjz83arss-guix-1.3.0-11.014f1b6/bin/guix gc -F10995116277760 > > > That's really problematic as it is blocking some other berlin services > such as Cuirass, which has 4564 packages in its fetch queue: > > mathieu@berlin ~$ less /var/log/cuirass-remote-server.log > [...] > 2021-11-12T12:47:01 period update: 0 resumable, 0 failed builds. > 2021-11-12T12:47:01 period update: 4564 items in the fetch queue. I'm more than happy to close this old, no longer relevant bug :-). Since it was reported, the storage was migrated to a much faster array, and is using the Btrfs file system with zstd compression, which avoids the inodes exhaustion issue we've had with ext4 in the past. A full garbage collection (GC) is run daily to keep the store growth in check and for the GC to always take a similar amount of time (less than 20 minutes) every day. -- Thanks, Maxim ------------=_1692183242-2099-1 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Nov 2021 11:49:14 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43602 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mlV3S-0003Zo-5F for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 06:49:14 -0500 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:49518) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mlV3Q-0003Zg-GF for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 06:49:13 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:45604) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mlV3Q-0000Bq-8v for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 06:49:12 -0500 Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=53196 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mlV3K-0003Du-VQ for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 06:49:11 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:Date:Subject:To:From:in-reply-to: references; bh=L6+QnlrYn47J+INqvi/3e31WWkGtQ/lDSyWSm+AW93k=; b=iReggNJs7bcFKh BBq5onFnOS7UGiCwIZ3dXGmUZ/UBu71mjK0u0A1iqhenHjSPFTalHWaOXRFWjRGzeg+hm60XAefrG socrDU2E1HwYxGaaJxyvCqLC6rqbVbORB0m4Ex8F5Lxx/9Q2062cMHP1hNHz49nBE4mN6fkm32N9L ZhRELQnln6cv2atOdfHB5+GtwYPbNuscVN58B7lIep2zfL0SEnAjmzR6PLszEq6mO4DjSCHYOI3rP 9gCgplWoVxFh/8/S9Y6AgwlyvHf392gx6RYWymzO4oFAbjjj9495Wv8PhT/FfuvFRqWA/Xo9WTBsb PTXlsn7Nq5oODAaH8KOQ==; Received: from [2a01:e0a:19b:d9a0:b4a5:c7aa:fee0:cc15] (port=60362 helo=meije) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mlV3K-0001zW-J2 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 06:49:06 -0500 From: Mathieu Othacehe To: bug-guix@gnu.org Subject: GC takes more than 9 hours on berlin Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2021 11:49:04 +0000 Message-ID: <87o86pegr3.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hello, On berlin, the daily GC command is still running whereas it was started 9 hours ago. --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- guix processes [...] SessionPID: 37231 ClientPID: 37195 ClientCommand: /gnu/store/49vfv8l1j96bbd73ssbqanpnjz83arss-guix-1.3.0-11.014f1b6/libexec/guix/guile \ /gnu/store/49vfv8l1j96bbd73ssbqanpnjz83arss-guix-1.3.0-11.014f1b6/bin/guix gc -F10995116277760 --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- and --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- mathieu@berlin ~$ ps auxww|grep 37195 root 37195 0.0 0.0 183260 33440 ? Sl 03:59 0:00 /gnu/store/49vfv8l1j96bbd73ssbqanpnjz83arss-guix-1.3.0-11.014f1b6/libexec/guix/guile \ /gnu/store/49vfv8l1j96bbd73ssbqanpnjz83arss-guix-1.3.0-11.014f1b6/bin/guix gc -F10995116277760 --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- That's really problematic as it is blocking some other berlin services such as Cuirass, which has 4564 packages in its fetch queue: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- mathieu@berlin ~$ less /var/log/cuirass-remote-server.log [...] 2021-11-12T12:47:01 period update: 0 resumable, 0 failed builds. 2021-11-12T12:47:01 period update: 4564 items in the fetch queue. --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- Thanks, Mathieu ------------=_1692183242-2099-1--