That one seems to work okay — again, I've gotten past 2GB and the hit-rate is within a few points of where it belongs. I don't have numbers for the same situation on .29 but IIRC it was very bad. So I guess .30 is an improvement there.
On Friday, August 12, 2016 at 3:34:00 PM UTC-4, Dormando wrote: > > Also, just for completeness: > > Does: > > `-C -m 10240 -I 20m -c 4096 -o modern` > > also fail under .30? (without the slab_chunk_max change) > > On Fri, 12 Aug 2016, dormando wrote: > > > FML. > > > > Please let me know how it goes. I'm going to take a hard look at this > and > > see about another bugfix release... there're a couple things I forgot > from > > .30 anyway. > > > > Your information will be very helpful though. Thanks again for testing > it. > > All of my testing recently was with explicit configuration options, so I > > didn't notice the glitch with -o modern :( > > > > On Fri, 12 Aug 2016, [email protected] <javascript:> wrote: > > > > > It will take a while to fill up entirely, but I passed 2GB with 0 > evictions, so it looks like that probably does the job. > > > > > > On Friday, August 12, 2016 at 3:02:47 PM UTC-4, Dormando wrote: > > > Ahhhh crap, I think I see it. > > > > > > Can you add: `-f 1.25` *after* the -o stuff? > > > > > > like this: > > > > > > `-C -m 10240 -I 20m -c 4096 -o modern,slab_chunk_max=1048576 -f > 1.25` > > > > > > And test that out, please? I might have to back out some > over-aggressive > > > switches... and I keep thinking of making this particular > problem (which > > > I'll talk about if confirmed) a startup error :( > > > > > > On Fri, 12 Aug 2016, [email protected] wrote: > > > > > > > Here you go. > > > > Yes, 1.4.25 is running with `-C -m 10240 -I 20m -c 4096 -o > maxconns_fast,hash_algorithm=murmur3,lru_maintainer,lru_crawler,slab_reassign,slab_automove`. > > > > > > 1.4.30 is running with `-C -m 10240 -I 20m -c 4096 -o > modern,slab_chunk_max=1048576`. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, August 12, 2016 at 2:32:59 PM UTC-4, Dormando > wrote: > > > > Hey, > > > > > > > > any chance I could see `stats slabs` output as well? a > lot of the data's > > > > in there. Need all three: stats, stats items, stats > slabs > > > > > > > > Also, did you try 1.4.30 with `-o > slab_chunk_max=1048576` as well? > > > > > > > > thanks > > > > > > > > On Fri, 12 Aug 2016, [email protected] wrote: > > > > > > > > > Thanks! That's an improvement. It's still worse than > older versions, but it's better than 1.4.29. This time it made it up to > about 1.75GB/10GB used > > > before it > > > > started evicting; > > > > > I left it running for another 8 hours and it got up to > 2GB, but no higher. > > > > > Here's some stats output from the old and new > versions, in case you can puzzle anything out of it. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > Andrew > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thursday, August 11, 2016 at 6:14:26 PM UTC-4, > Dormando wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/memcached/memcached/wiki/ReleaseNotes1430 > > > > > > > > > > Can you please try this? And let me know how it > goes either way :) > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 10 Aug 2016, dormando wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hey, > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks and sorry about that. I just found a > bug this week where the new > > > > > > code is over-allocating (though 30MB out of > 10G limit seems odd?) > > > > > > > > > > > > ie: with -I 2m, it would allocate 2 megabytes > of memory and then only use > > > > > > up to 1mb of it. A one-line fix for a missed > variable conversion. > > > > > > > > > > > > Will likely do a bugfix release later tonight > with that and a few other > > > > > > things. > > > > > > > > > > > > Will take a look at your data in hopes it's > the same issue at least, > > > > > > thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 10 Aug 2016, [email protected] wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I decided to give this a try on a production > setup that has a very bimodal size distribution (about a 50/50 split of > 10k-100k values and 1M-10M > > > values) > > > > and > > > > > lots of writes, > > > > > > > where we've been running with "-I 10m -m > 10240" for a while. It didn't go so great. Almost immediately there were > lots and lots of evictions, > > > even > > > > though the > > > > > used memory was > > > > > > > only about 30MB of the 10GB limit, and the > number of active keys grew very slowly. "-o slab_chunk_max=1048576" may > have had some effect, but it > > > didn't > > > > really > > > > > seem like it. > > > > > > > Setting "slabs automove 2" (usually 1) > reduced evictions about 50% but it still wasn't enough to get acceptable > performance. > > > > > > > I've rolled back to 1.4.25 for the moment, > but I'm attaching a log with "stats" and "stats items" from yesterday. > "stats sizes" wasn't > > > available due to > > > > -C, and > > > > > the log isn't > > > > > > > from as long after startup as I would like, > but it's what I got, sorry. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Let me know if there's anything else I can > do to help. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Andrew > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, July 13, 2016 at 8:08:49 PM > UTC-4, Dormando wrote: > > > > > > > > https://github.com/memcached/memcached/wiki/ReleaseNotes1429 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > enjoy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > You received this message because you are > subscribed to the Google Groups "memcached" group. > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop > receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. > > > > > > > > For more options, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > You received this message because you are > subscribed to the Google Groups "memcached" group. > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop > receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. > > > > > > > For more options, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed > to the Google Groups "memcached" group. > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving > emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. > > > > > For more options, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > --- > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the > Google Groups "memcached" group. > > > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from > it, send an email to [email protected]. > > > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > --- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "memcached" group. > > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > an email to [email protected] <javascript:>. > > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > --- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "memcached" group. > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > an email to [email protected] <javascript:>. > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "memcached" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
