Re: [Bacula-users] Accurate backup and memory usage

>>>>> On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 13:36:36 +0100, Christian Manal said:
> 
> Am 18.03.2011 13:03, schrieb Martin Simmons:
> >>>>>> On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 11:37:33 +0100, Christian Manal said:
> >>
> >> Am 18.03.2011 10:40, schrieb Christian Manal:
> >>> Am 16.03.2011 09:14, schrieb Christian Manal:
> >>>> Am 15.03.2011 19:12, schrieb Christian Manal:
>>>>> Am 15.03.2011 17:49, schrieb Kjetil Torgrim Homme:
> >>>>>> Christian Manal <moenoel AT informatik.uni-bremen DOT de> writes:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Also, after several accurate jobs running without restarting Bacula,
> >>>>>> the total memory usage of the director and fd didn't go up anymore, so
> >>>>>> I presume it comes down to the behavior of Solaris' free(), as
> >>>>>> described in the above quoted manpage.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> libumem may work better -- just set LD_PRELOAD, you don't have to
> >>>>>> recompile.  I'd appreciate it if you report back if you try it.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
>>>>> Actually, I already did that. Modified the startup script for the
>>>>> affected fd (don't want the director crashing if things go wrong) and
>>>>> restarted. I will report the results tomorrow.
> >>>>
> >>>> Looks good. 
> >>>
> >>> Maybe I spoke too soon. Last night my director crashed with a segfault,
> >>> after switching to libumem. Leading to that was an unusually long
> >>> running job (the accurate one) which, going by the size, looked like it
> >>> was doing a full instead of incremental for some reason.
> >>>
> >>> I have some output from mdb and pstack attached.
> >>
> >> And going by dbx, the dir went kaboom in Jmsg().
> >> ...
> >> =>[1] Jmsg(0xbefe5be0, 0x1, 0x0, 0x0, 0xfee8e25e, 0xf6caddb0), at 
> >> 0xfee6a580 
> >>   [2] j_msg(0x80c360e, 0x154, 0xbefe5be0, 0x1, 0x0, 0x0), at 0xfee6a7ad 
> >>   [3] start_storage_daemon_message_thread(0xbefe5be0, 0x80bc7f5, 
> >> 0xfdc7f960, 0x0, 0x80bc798, 0xfde8fe6c), at 0x80834bc 
> >>   [4] do_backup(0xbefe5be0, 0x4, 0x0, 0xfdf91200, 0xfeea26e4, 0xfdf91200), 
> >> at 0x80658b0 
> >>   [5] _ZL10job_threadPv(0xbefe5be0, 0x1, 0xfe7c0dc7, 0xfe8422cc, 
> >> 0xfe8422c0, 0xfdf91200), at 0x807a96e 
> >>   [6] jobq_server(0x80e5080), at 0x807d127 
> >>   [7] _thr_setup(0xfdf91200), at 0xfe7c7e66 
> >>   [8] _lwp_start(0xfee8e708, 0x0, 0x0, 0xfde8ea00, 0x7, 0x0), at 
> >> 0xfe7c8150 
> > 
> > It looks like it ran out of memory (the segfault is deliberate, due to 
> > failure
> > to create a thread in start_storage_daemon_message_thread).
> 
> That's strange. I'm monitoring that box with Nagios + pnp4nagios.
> Neither did Nagios report unusually high memory usage nor do I see a
> spike on the pnp4nagios graphs for memory and swap.
> 
> 
> > Did it write any info to the Bacula log?  It should say "Cannot create 
> > message
> > thread:" followed by the error message.
> 
> The logfile just cleanly ends after the last finished job. But it seems
> to be in the coredump:
> 
> core:msgchan.c:340 Cannot create message thread: Resource temporarily
> unavailable

"Resource temporarily unavailable" occurs when Solaris can't allocate the
stack for a new thread, so memory pressure is a likely reason.  It may be
invisible to Nagios if the memory is just reserved rather than being in use
(something that malloc implementations will do differently).

__Martin

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Colocation vs. Managed Hosting
A question and answer guide to determining the best fit
for your organization - today and in the future.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/internap-sfd2d
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users