[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#1023870: dpkg: Problems in buildds due to slow compression



Hi,

On 2022-11-13 02:00, Guillem Jover wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> On Sun, 2022-11-13 at 00:17:36 +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > On 2022-11-12 22:28, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2022-11-11 at 19:15:59 +0100, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo wrote:
> > > > Package: dpkg
> > > > Version: 1.21.9
> > > > Severity: normal
> > > > X-Debbugs-Cc: mafm@debian.org, debian-wb-team@lists.debian.org
> > > 
> > > > After some investigation by aurel32 and myself, this was traced back to the
> > > > commit f8d254943051e085040367d689048c00f31514c3 [2], in which the calculation of
> > > > the memory that can be used, to determine the number of threads to use, was
> > > > changed from half of the physical mem to be based on the memory available.
> > > 
> > > Ah, thanks for tracking this down! I think the problem is the usual
> > > "available" memory does not really mean what people think it means. :/
> > > And I unfortunately missed that (even thought I was aware of it) when
> > > reviewing the patch.
> > > 
> > > Attached is something I just quickly prepared, which I'll clean up and
> > > merge for the upcoming 1.21.10. Let me know if that solves the issue
> > > for you, otherwise we'd need to look for further changes.
> > 
> > Thanks for providing a patch. I have not been able yet to try it for the
> > case where we have found the issue, i.e. building linux. However I have
> > tried to setup a similar environment:
> 
> > - I took a just booted VM with 4 GB RAM, 4 GB swap and 4 GB tmpfs, and very few
> >   things running on it.
> > - I filled the tmpfs with 4 GB of random data, which means that after
> >   moving the content of the tmpfs to the swap, 4 GB could still be used
> >   without issue.
> > - I ended up with the following /proc/meminfo:
> > MemTotal:        3951508 kB
> > MemFree:          130976 kB
> > MemAvailable:      10584 kB
> > Buffers:            2448 kB
> > Cached:          3694676 kB
> > SwapCached:        12936 kB
> > Active:          3111920 kB
> > Inactive:         610376 kB
> > Active(anon):    3102668 kB
> > Inactive(anon):   606952 kB
> > Active(file):       9252 kB
> > Inactive(file):     3424 kB
> > Unevictable:           0 kB
> > Mlocked:               0 kB
> > SwapTotal:       4194300 kB
> > SwapFree:        3777400 kB
> > Zswap:                 0 kB
> > Zswapped:              0 kB
> > Dirty:                 0 kB
> > Writeback:             0 kB
> > AnonPages:         12960 kB
> > Mapped:             6700 kB
> > Shmem:           3684416 kB
> > KReclaimable:      27616 kB
> > Slab:              54652 kB
> > SReclaimable:      27616 kB
> > SUnreclaim:        27036 kB
> > KernelStack:        2496 kB
> > PageTables:         1516 kB
> > NFS_Unstable:          0 kB
> > Bounce:                0 kB
> > WritebackTmp:          0 kB
> > CommitLimit:     6170052 kB
> > Committed_AS:    4212940 kB
> > VmallocTotal:   34359738367 kB
> > VmallocUsed:       16116 kB
> > VmallocChunk:          0 kB
> > Percpu:             2288 kB
> > HardwareCorrupted:     0 kB
> > AnonHugePages:         0 kB
> > ShmemHugePages:        0 kB
> > ShmemPmdMapped:        0 kB
> > FileHugePages:         0 kB
> > FilePmdMapped:         0 kB
> > HugePages_Total:       0
> > HugePages_Free:        0
> > HugePages_Rsvd:        0
> > HugePages_Surp:        0
> > Hugepagesize:       2048 kB
> > Hugetlb:               0 kB
> > DirectMap4k:      110452 kB
> > DirectMap2M:     5132288 kB
> > DirectMap1G:     5242880 kB
> 
> > With the current version of dpkg, it means it consider 10584 kB are available
> > (not however that there is 130976 kB of unused physical RAM). With your patch,
> > it's a bit better, as it would be 123408 kB. Still far less that one the VM is
> > capable of.
> 
> Err sorry, the patch was computing the used memory and not the truly
> available one! The updated patch should do better. :)

Thanks for the updated patch. Computing the available memory manually
from the above values sounds like it should work, so I'll give it a try.

Cheers
Aurelien

-- 
Aurelien Jarno                          GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B
aurelien@aurel32.net                 http://www.aurel32.net


Reply to: