Bug 1560101

Summary: RGW spinning at 100% CPU with no op traffic
Product: [Red Hat Storage] Red Hat Ceph Storage Reporter: Michael J. Kidd <linuxkidd>
Component: RGWAssignee: Matt Benjamin (redhat) <mbenjamin>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Tejas <tchandra>
Severity: medium Docs Contact: John Brier <jbrier>
Priority: high    
Version: 2.3CC: bengland, bschmaus, cbodley, ceph-eng-bugs, jbrier, kbader, mbenjamin, mkogan, mwatts, owasserm, sweil, tchandra, tserlin
Target Milestone: rc   
Target Release: 3.1   
Hardware: x86_64   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: RHEL: ceph-12.2.5-13.el7cp Ubuntu: 12.2.5-4redhat1xenial Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
.RGW no longer spikes to 100% CPU usage with no op traffic Previously in certain situations an infinite loop could be encountered in `rgw_get_system_obj()`. This could cause spikes in CPU usage. With this update to {product} this specific issue has been resolved.
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
: 1595386 (view as bug list) Environment:
Last Closed: 2018-09-26 18:19:40 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 1584264, 1595386    

Comment 23 Ben England 2018-03-28 14:08:26 UTC
I disagree.  The most busy thread you found with top -H was only 20% of 1 core.  What is the overall CPU utilization on that host?  If it isn't above 60-70% then there is no CPU bottleneck.

Comment 33 Adam C. Emerson 2018-05-14 17:18:35 UTC
Seems unlikely, that would look like repeated calls rather than spinning and it's bounded.

Comment 47 errata-xmlrpc 2018-09-26 18:19:40 UTC
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2018:2819