As the name suggests, I am using a simple RPC system between a PC (windows x64) and an embedded linux PC running ubuntu. The embedded linux pc is the RPC server and the PC is the RPC client. The RPC framework is: erpc.
I have noticed that the transaction rate I am getting is particularly low - on the order of 20 transactions/sec.
The issue is definitely not hardware related as I have an alternate RPC system (which I'm trying to replace with the contentious one) which can easily get over 1000 transactions/sec using the exact same hardware configuration.
To further prove this,I also wrote a simple python script which acts as a simple socket client or server depending on a switch. I run it on the embedded machine as a server and as a client on the pc. The script simply has the client send some random data to the server which in turn sends the data back. The client does this a few hundred times and determines the transaction rate based on this. The amount of data transmitted is of the same order as what erpc uses. Using this setup I can get 3000+ transactions/sec.
The RPC system in question is half duplex. Only a single thread is used. Server recvs, processes the request and sends the response in a loop.
Only a single socket is used for the duration of the test. I.e. no close and accepts occur during the loop. No other IO occurs. Or at least, I have refactored it for the purposes of these tests to not do any other IO.
On the Windows client side, I have a python unit test which I have run with profiling on. The results don't seem to indicate that the problem is on the client.
ncalls tottime percall cumtime percall filename:lineno(function)
1 0.000 0.000 23.998 23.998 runner.py:105(pytest_runtest_call)
1 0.000 0.000 23.998 23.998 python.py:1313(runtest)
1 0.000 0.000 23.998 23.998 __init__.py:603(__call__)
1 0.000 0.000 23.998 23.998 __init__.py:219(_hookexec)
1 0.000 0.000 23.998 23.998 __init__.py:213(<lambda>)
1 0.000 0.000 23.998 23.998 callers.py:151(_multicall)
1 0.000 0.000 23.998 23.998 python.py:183(pytest_pyfunc_call)
1 0.003 0.003 23.998 23.998 test_static_if.py:4(test_read_version)
400 0.014 0.000 23.993 0.060 client.py:16(get_version)
400 0.017 0.000 23.942 0.060 client.py:79(perform_request)
400 0.006 0.000 23.828 0.060 transport.py:75(receive)
800 0.016 0.000 23.820 0.030 transport.py:139(_base_receive)
800 23.803 0.030 23.803 0.030 {method 'recv' of '_socket.socket' objects}
400 0.007 0.000 0.061 0.000 transport.py:65(send)
400 0.002 0.000 0.053 0.000 transport.py:135(_base_send)
400 0.050 0.000 0.050 0.000 {method 'sendall' of '_socket.socket' objects}
400 0.012 0.000 0.032 0.000 basic_codec.py:113(start_read_message)
400 0.006 0.000 0.015 0.000 basic_codec.py:39(start_write_message)
1600 0.007 0.000 0.015 0.000 basic_codec.py:130(_read)
800 0.002 0.000 0.012 0.000 basic_codec.py:156(read_uint32)
The server is a C++ application. I have tried profiling it with gprof but the results of that show practically no time consumed by the application at all. After reading up a bit more about how gprof works and how gprof doesn't accumulate time spent in system calls, this indicates that the program is (obviously) IO bound and that the vast majority of time is spent in blocking system calls.
I won't add the entire output here for brevity but below is an exerpt:
Flat profile:
Each sample counts as 0.01 seconds.
no time accumulated
% cumulative self self total
time seconds seconds calls Ts/call Ts/call name
0.00 0.00 0.00 2407 0.00 0.00 erpc::MessageBuffer::get()
0.00 0.00 0.00 2400 0.00 0.00 erpc::MessageBuffer::setUsed(unsigned short)
0.00 0.00 0.00 2000 0.00 0.00 erpc::MessageBuffer::getUsed() const
0.00 0.00 0.00 1600 0.00 0.00 erpc::MessageBuffer::Cursor::write(void const*, unsigned int)
0.00 0.00 0.00 1201 0.00 0.00 erpc::Codec::getBuffer()
0.00 0.00 0.00 803 0.00 0.00 erpc::MessageBuffer::Cursor::set(erpc::MessageBuffer*)
0.00 0.00 0.00 803 0.00 0.00 erpc::MessageBuffer::getLength() const
0.00 0.00 0.00 802 0.00 0.00 erpc::Codec::reset()
0.00 0.00 0.00 801 0.00 0.00 erpc::TCPTransport::underlyingReceive(unsigned char*, unsigned int)
0.00 0.00 0.00 800 0.00 0.00 erpc::TCPTransport::underlyingSend(unsigned char const*, unsigned int)
0.00 0.00 0.00 800 0.00 0.00 erpc::BasicCodec::read(unsigned int*)
0.00 0.00 0.00 800 0.00 0.00 erpc::BasicCodec::write(int)
0.00 0.00 0.00 800 0.00 0.00 erpc::BasicCodec::write(unsigned int)
0.00 0.00 0.00 800 0.00 0.00 erpc::MessageBuffer::Cursor::read(void*, unsigned int)
0.00 0.00 0.00 800 0.00 0.00 erpc::Service::getServiceId() const
0.00 0.00 0.00 403 0.00 0.00 erpc::Service::getNext()
0.00 0.00 0.00 401 0.00 0.00 erpc::SimpleServer::runInternal(erpc::Codec*)
0.00 0.00 0.00 401 0.00 0.00 erpc::TCPTransport::accept()
0.00 0.00 0.00 401 0.00 0.00 erpc::TCPTransport::receive(erpc::MessageBuffer*)
0.00 0.00 0.00 401 0.00 0.00 erpc::FramedTransport::receive(erpc::MessageBuffer*)
0.00 0.00 0.00 400 0.00 0.00 write_p_version_t_struct(erpc::Codec*, p_version_t const*)
0.00 0.00 0.00 400 0.00 0.00 StaticIF_service::handleInvocation(unsigned int, unsigned int, erpc::Codec*, erpc::MessageBufferFactory*)
0.00 0.00 0.00 400 0.00 0.00 StaticIF_service::get_version_shim(erpc::Codec*, erpc::MessageBufferFactory*, unsigned int)
0.00 0.00 0.00 400 0.00 0.00 erpc::BasicCodec::endReadMessage()
0.00 0.00 0.00 400 0.00 0.00 erpc::BasicCodec::endWriteStruct()
0.00 0.00 0.00 400 0.00 0.00 erpc::BasicCodec::endWriteMessage()
0.00 0.00 0.00 400 0.00 0.00 erpc::BasicCodec::startReadMessage(erpc::_message_type*, unsigned int*, unsigned int*, unsigned int*)
0.00 0.00 0.00 400 0.00 0.00 erpc::BasicCodec::startWriteStruct()
0.00 0.00 0.00 400 0.00 0.00 erpc::BasicCodec::startWriteMessage(erpc::_message_type, unsigned int, unsigned int, unsigned int)
0.00 0.00 0.00 400 0.00 0.00 erpc::FramedTransport::send(erpc::MessageBuffer*)
0.00 0.00 0.00 400 0.00 0.00 erpc::MessageBufferFactory::prepareServerBufferForSend(erpc::MessageBuffer*)
0.00 0.00 0.00 400 0.00 0.00 erpc::Server::processMessage(erpc::Codec*, erpc::_message_type&)
0.00 0.00 0.00 400 0.00 0.00 erpc::Server::findServiceWithId(unsigned int)
0.00 0.00 0.00 400 0.00 0.00 get_version
0.00 0.00 0.00 5 0.00 0.00 erpc::ManuallyConstructed<erpc::SimpleServer>::get()
0.00 0.00 0.00 4 0.00 0.00 operator new(unsigned int, void*)
0.00 0.00 0.00 3 0.00 0.00 erpc::ManuallyConstructed<erpc::SimpleServer>::operator->()
0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.00 0.00 erpc::ManuallyConstructed<erpc::TCPTransport>::get()
0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.00 0.00 erpc::ManuallyConstructed<erpc::BasicCodecFactory>::get()
0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.00 0.00 erpc::Server::addService(erpc::Service*)
0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.00 0.00 erpc::Service::Service(unsigned int)
0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.00 0.00 erpc::Service::~Service()
0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.00 0.00 erpc_add_service_to_server
0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 0.00 _GLOBAL__sub_I__Z5usagev
Using strace, the problem becomes apparent in the first recv of every request. For context, an initial header is transmitted first which indicates the amount of data the request proper contains.
Here's a couple of excerpts from the output (the full output is 2000 lines).
I used the -r, -T and -C switches which show a relative timestamp for each call, prints the time spent in each call and also shows the summary respectively.
In the transaction loop:
0.000161 recv(4, "\10\0", 2, 0) = 2 <0.059478>
0.059589 recv(4, "q\1\1\2\0\1\0\0", 8, 0) = 8 <0.000047>
0.000167 send(4, "\20\0", 2, 0) = 2 <0.000073>
0.000183 send(4, "q\1\1\2\2\1\0\0\235\256\322\2664\22\0\0", 16, 0) = 16 <0.000050>
0.000160 recv(4, "\10\0", 2, 0) = 2 <0.059513>
0.059625 recv(4, "r\1\1\2\0\1\0\0", 8, 0) = 8 <0.000046>
0.000167 send(4, "\20\0", 2, 0) = 2 <0.000071>
0.000182 send(4, "r\1\1\2\2\1\0\0\235\256\322\2664\22\0\0", 16, 0) = 16 <0.000049>
0.000161 recv(4, "\10\0", 2, 0) = 2 <0.059059>
0.059172 recv(4, "s\1\1\2\0\1\0\0", 8, 0) = 8 <0.000047>
0.000183 send(4, "\20\0", 2, 0) = 2 <0.000073>
0.000183 send(4, "s\1\1\2\2\1\0\0\235\256\322\2664\22\0\0", 16, 0) = 16 <0.000049>
0.000161 recv(4, "\10\0", 2, 0) = 2 <0.059330>
0.059441 recv(4, "t\1\1\2\0\1\0\0", 8, 0) = 8 <0.000046>
0.000166 send(4, "\20\0", 2, 0) = 2 <0.000072>
0.000182 send(4, "t\1\1\2\2\1\0\0\235\256\322\2664\22\0\0", 16, 0) = 16 <0.000050>
0.000163 recv(4, "\10\0", 2, 0) = 2 <0.059506>
0.059618 recv(4, "u\1\1\2\0\1\0\0", 8, 0) = 8 <0.000046>
0.000166 send(4, "\20\0", 2, 0) = 2 <0.000070>
0.000181 send(4, "u\1\1\2\2\1\0\0\235\256\322\2664\22\0\0", 16, 0) = 16 <0.000049>
0.000160 recv(4, "\10\0", 2, 0) = 2 <0.059359>
0.059488 recv(4, "v\1\1\2\0\1\0\0", 8, 0) = 8 <0.000048>
0.000175 send(4, "\20\0", 2, 0) = 2 <0.000077>
0.000189 send(4, "v\1\1\2\2\1\0\0\235\256\322\2664\22\0\0", 16, 0) = 16 <0.000051>
0.000165 recv(4, "\10\0", 2, 0) = 2 <0.059496>
0.059612 recv(4, "w\1\1\2\0\1\0\0", 8, 0) = 8 <0.000046>
0.000170 send(4, "\20\0", 2, 0) = 2 <0.000074>
0.000182 send(4, "w\1\1\2\2\1\0\0\235\256\322\2664\22\0\0", 16, 0) = 16 <0.000050>
The summary:
% time seconds usecs/call calls errors syscall
------ ----------- ----------- --------- --------- ----------------
98.59 0.010000 12 801 recv
1.41 0.000143 0 800 send
0.00 0.000000 0 12 read
0.00 0.000000 0 3 write
0.00 0.000000 0 25 19 open
0.00 0.000000 0 7 close
0.00 0.000000 0 1 execve
0.00 0.000000 0 8 lseek
0.00 0.000000 0 6 6 access
0.00 0.000000 0 3 brk
0.00 0.000000 0 1 readlink
0.00 0.000000 0 1 munmap
0.00 0.000000 0 2 setitimer
0.00 0.000000 0 1 uname
0.00 0.000000 0 9 mprotect
0.00 0.000000 0 5 writev
0.00 0.000000 0 2 rt_sigaction
0.00 0.000000 0 16 mmap2
0.00 0.000000 0 16 15 stat64
0.00 0.000000 0 6 fstat64
0.00 0.000000 0 1 socket
0.00 0.000000 0 1 bind
0.00 0.000000 0 1 listen
0.00 0.000000 0 1 accept
0.00 0.000000 0 1 setsockopt
0.00 0.000000 0 1 set_tls
------ ----------- ----------- --------- --------- ----------------
100.00 0.010143 1731 40 total
In passing, I am not sure I completely understand the summary. The summary suggests that recv happens very quick compared to the time indicated in each call to recv.
It looks like the time spent in the first recv is what is killing the RPC system at nearly 60ms per call. Am I misreading this? I am not sure of the units but so I am guessing seconds.
So, after profiling both the client and the server, it appears the vast amount of time is spent in recv.
If we assumed that extra time spent in the intitial recv on the server side was because the client was still processing something and hadn't send it yet, that should have shown up when profiling the client.
Any suggestions you may have as to how to further debug this would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks!
The old output from my logs which showing Avg values after ctrl+c
#pidstat 1 -p `pgrep bgpd`
Linux 3.16.7-gd1a374d-dellz9100on (rtr1) Tuesday 29 May 2018 _x86_64_ (4 CPU)
05:07:01 UTC UID PID %usr %system %guest %CPU CPU Command
05:07:07 UTC 0 2144 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 bgpd
05:07:08 UTC 0 2144 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 bgpd
05:07:09 UTC 0 2144 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 bgpd
05:07:10 UTC 0 2144 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 bgpd
05:07:11 UTC 0 2144 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 bgpd
05:07:12 UTC 0 2144 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 bgpd
^C
Average: 0 2144 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.09 - bgpd
Now it is not showing Avg values
# pidstat 1 -p `pgrep bgpd`
Linux 3.16.7-gd1a374d-dellz9100on (rtr1) 06/13/18 _x86_64_ (4 CPU)
07:32:51 PID %usr %system %guest %CPU CPU Command
07:32:56 2144 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 bgpd
07:32:57 2144 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 bgpd
07:32:58 2144 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 bgpd
^C
#
Version of pidstat
root#rtr1:/home/ocnos# pidstat -V
sysstat version 10.0.5
(C) Sebastien Godard (sysstat <at> orange.fr)
root#rtr1:/home/ocnos#
The mail reply from Developer of this tools
No, your previous version was not 9.x.
This feature (displaying average stats when Ctrl/C is hit) was added to pidstat in release 10.1.4.
Regards,
Sebastien.
I'm trying to parse iostat -x 1 2 command's output to monitor remote computer from my java application.
This is the output:
Linux 2.6.39-400.126.1.el5uek (abcprod.abc-en.local) 02/27/2014
avg-cpu: %user %nice %system %iowait %steal %idle
2.57 0.00 0.87 0.01 0.00 96.56
Device: rrqm/s wrqm/s r/s w/s rsec/s wsec/s avgrq-sz avgqu-sz await svctm %util
sda 0.00 54.24 0.35 10.64 6.95 518.97 47.89 0.01 1.06 0.19 0.21
sda1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 68.40 0.00 2.08 0.94 0.00
sda2 0.00 54.23 0.35 10.64 6.94 518.97 47.89 0.01 1.06 0.19 0.21
dm-0 0.00 0.00 0.18 48.77 4.18 390.19 8.06 0.08 1.63 0.02 0.10
dm-1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.00 0.00 1.06 0.18 0.00
dm-2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.00 0.00 1.78 0.14 0.00
dm-3 0.00 0.00 0.17 16.10 2.76 128.78 8.09 0.03 2.10 0.07 0.11
avg-cpu: %user %nice %system %iowait %steal %idle
11.61 0.00 3.20 0.00 0.00 85.19
Device: rrqm/s wrqm/s r/s w/s rsec/s wsec/s avgrq-sz avgqu-sz await svctm %util
sda 0.00 191.00 0.00 43.00 0.00 1872.00 43.53 0.00 0.09 0.05 0.20
sda1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
sda2 0.00 191.00 0.00 43.00 0.00 1872.00 43.53 0.00 0.09 0.05 0.20
dm-0 0.00 0.00 0.00 234.00 0.00 1872.00 8.00 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.20
dm-1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
dm-2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
dm-3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
I only need the second part of the output(beginning from fourth paragraph):
avg-cpu: %user %nice %system %iowait %steal %idle
11.61 0.00 3.20 0.00 0.00 85.19
Device: rrqm/s wrqm/s r/s w/s rsec/s wsec/s avgrq-sz avgqu-sz await svctm %util
sda 0.00 191.00 0.00 43.00 0.00 1872.00 43.53 0.00 0.09 0.05 0.20
sda1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
sda2 0.00 191.00 0.00 43.00 0.00 1872.00 43.53 0.00 0.09 0.05 0.20
dm-0 0.00 0.00 0.00 234.00 0.00 1872.00 8.00 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.20
dm-1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
dm-2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
dm-3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Do not how to use grep to do it, but you can use perl:
iostat -x 1 2 | perl -e 'local $/=""; #p=<STDIN>; print #p[3,4];'
Some explanations:
local, see perlsub
A local modifies its listed variables to be "local" to the enclosing block, eval, or do FILE --and to any subroutine called from within that block. A local just gives temporary values to global (meaning package) variables.
$/, see perlvar
The input record separator, newline by default. This influences Perl's idea of what a "line" is.
If the number of the lines for the first paragraph is fixed you can use sed like this
iostat -x 1 2 | sed 'N,$!d' - where N is the number of the lines of first paragraph
I have a computation inside ST which allocates memory through a Data.Vector.Unboxed.Mutable. The vector is never read or written, nor is any reference retained to it outside of runST (to the best of my knowledge). The problem I have is that when I run my ST computation multiple times, I sometimes seem to keep the memory for the vector around.
Allocation statistics:
5,435,386,768 bytes allocated in the heap
5,313,968 bytes copied during GC
134,364,780 bytes maximum residency (14 sample(s))
3,160,340 bytes maximum slop
518 MB total memory in use (0 MB lost due to fragmentation)
Here I call runST 20x with different values for my computation and a 128MB vector (again - unused, not returned or referenced outside of ST). The maximum residency looks good, basically just my vector plus a few MB of other stuff. But the total memory use indicates that I have four copies of the vector active at the same time. This scales perfectly with the size of the vector, for 256MB we get 1030MB as expected.
Using a 1GB vector runs out of memory (4x1GB + overhead > 32bit). I don't understand why the RTS keeps seemingly unused, unreferenced memory around instead of just GC'ing it, at least at the point where an allocation would otherwise fail.
Running with +RTS -S reveals the following:
Alloc Copied Live GC GC TOT TOT Page Flts
bytes bytes bytes user elap user elap
134940616 13056 134353540 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.19 0 0 (Gen: 1)
583416 6756 134347504 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.19 0 0 (Gen: 0)
518020 17396 134349640 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.19 0 0 (Gen: 1)
521104 13032 134359988 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.19 0 0 (Gen: 0)
520972 1344 134360752 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.19 0 0 (Gen: 0)
521100 828 134360684 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.19 0 0 (Gen: 0)
520812 592 134360528 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.19 0 0 (Gen: 0)
520936 1344 134361324 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.19 0 0 (Gen: 0)
520788 1480 134361476 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.20 0 0 (Gen: 0)
134438548 5964 268673908 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.38 0 0 (Gen: 0)
586300 3084 268667168 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.38 0 0 (Gen: 0)
517840 952 268666340 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.38 0 0 (Gen: 0)
520920 544 268666164 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.38 0 0 (Gen: 0)
520780 428 268666048 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.38 0 0 (Gen: 0)
520820 2908 268668524 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.38 0 0 (Gen: 0)
520732 1788 268668636 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.39 0 0 (Gen: 0)
521076 564 268668492 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.39 0 0 (Gen: 0)
520532 712 268668640 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.39 0 0 (Gen: 0)
520764 956 268668884 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.39 0 0 (Gen: 0)
520816 420 268668348 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.39 0 0 (Gen: 0)
520948 1332 268669260 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.39 0 0 (Gen: 0)
520784 616 268668544 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.39 0 0 (Gen: 0)
521416 836 268668764 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.39 0 0 (Gen: 0)
520488 1240 268669168 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.40 0 0 (Gen: 0)
520824 1608 268669536 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.40 0 0 (Gen: 0)
520688 1276 268669204 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.40 0 0 (Gen: 0)
520252 1332 268669260 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.40 0 0 (Gen: 0)
520672 1000 268668928 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.40 0 0 (Gen: 0)
134553500 5640 402973292 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.58 0 0 (Gen: 0)
586776 2644 402966160 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.58 0 0 (Gen: 0)
518064 26784 134342772 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.58 0 0 (Gen: 1)
520828 3120 134343528 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.59 0 0 (Gen: 0)
521108 756 134342668 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.59 0 0 (Gen: 0)
Here it seems we have 'live bytes' exceeding ~128MB.
The +RTS -hy profile basically just says we allocate 128MB:
http://imageshack.us/a/img69/7765/45q8.png
I tried reproducing this behavior in a simpler program, but even with replicating the exact setup with ST, a Reader containing the Vector, same monad/program structure etc. the simple test program doesn't show this. Simplifying my big program the behavior also stops eventually when removing apparently completely unrelated code.
Qs:
Am I really keeping this vector around 4 times out of 20?
If yes, how do I actually tell since +RTS -Hy and maximum residency claim I'm not, and what can I do to stop this behavior?
If no, why is Haskell not GC'ing it and running out of address space / memory, and what can I do to stop this behavior?
Thanks!
I suspect this is a bug in GHC and/or the RTS.
First, I'm confident there is no actual space leak or anything like that.
Reasons:
The vector is never used anywhere. Not read, not written, not referenced. It should be collected once runST is done. Even when the ST computation returns a single Int which is immediately printed out to evaluate it, the memory issue still exists. There is no reference to that data.
Every profiling mode the RTS offers is in violent agreement that I never actually have more than a single vector's worth of memory allocated/referenced. Every statistic and pretty chart says that.
Now, here's the interesting bit. If I manually force the GC by calling System.Mem.performGC after every run of my function, the problem goes away, completely.
So we have a case where the runtime has GBs worth of memory which (demonstrably!) can be reclaimed by the GC and even according to its own statistic is not held by anybody anymore. When running out of its memory pool the runtime does not collect, but instead asks the OS for more memory. And even when that finally fails, the runtime still does not collect (which would reclaim GBs of memory, demonstrably) but instead chooses to terminate the program with an out-of-memory error.
I'm no expert on Haskell, GHC or GC. But this does look awfully broken to me. I'll report this as a bug.
Device: rrqm/s wrqm/s r/s w/s rkB/s wkB/s avgrq-sz avgqu-sz await svctm %util
sda 0.01 1.38 0.02 0.51 0.37 7.56 29.42 0.02 31.72 6.15 0.33
sda1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 53.57 0.00 71.60 15.33 0.00
sda2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 38.77 0.00 14.13 13.56 0.00
sda3 0.00 0.20 0.02 0.11 0.30 1.23 24.46 0.00 35.65 9.69 0.12
sda4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 8.12 8.12 0.00
sda5 0.00 1.11 0.01 0.24 0.06 5.43 44.15 0.01 44.22 7.06 0.18
sda6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 39.47 0.00 51.98 17.60 0.00
sda7 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 23.46 0.00 23.69 13.80 0.00
sda8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.04 11.37 0.00 36.27 24.38 0.02
sda9 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.84 10.79 0.00 8.46 7.56 0.12
I've a graph that looks like this...Is it consider high at 12.5 /s ?How do i interpret if i/o is good or bad?