Bug 99168

From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 Galeon/1.2.11 (X11; Linux i686; U;) Gecko/20030314

Description of problem:
A simple MTA benchmark for postfix exhibits ~60% performance drop when run on a
system with high memory (total RAM >896MB), compared to a low memory system. 

We have traced this down to two reasons:

a) the fact that most drivers for hardware RAID don't support high memory IO
properly;

b) the "2.4.7-highmemspeed" patch included in RedHat's 2.4.9-e.xy and
2.4.18-[78] kernel series slows down bounce buffer allocation.


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
kernel <= 2.4.9-e.25, 2.4.18-27.7.x 

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:

1. Setup network (ethernet 100MBit/s) with 3 hosts ("source", "mta", "sink").

2. On "sink", run the postfix "smtp-sink" program.

3. On "mta", setup the postfix MTA. Specify "sink" as the relay host. Put the
postfix queue directory on an ext3 partition mounted with
"data=journal,noatime". This partition must be on a block device with a driver
without high-memory IO support such as DAC960, aacraid, or dpt_i2o (those are
the ones we tested). System must have >896MB memory installed.

To improve performance, setup asynchronous mail logging in /etc/syslog.conf:
mail.*	-/var/log/maillog

3. On "source", run the postal benchmark
(http://www.coker.com.au/postal/postal-0.62.tgz) 
with options "-m 150 -p 5 -c 30 -r 6000" (i.e. max message sie 150kB, 
5 parallel processes, 30 mesgs/connection, max. 6000 msg/min). 

(I am only specifying the options exactly here to make sure numbers are
comparable, other options will show the same performance-degrading effect).


Actual Results:  The postal benchmark will show ~1500 mails/min, as opposed to
~3500 if less than 896MB of memory is installed (or if memory is limited with
the mem=XXXM  option).


Expected Results:  ~3500 mails/min, as in the low-memory case.
RedHat's 2.4.20-xy.7  series, as well as vanilla kernels, also do not show this
performance drop.



Additional info:

The 'bottleneck' in the simple MTA benchmark described is synchronous disk IO,
mostly in the journal of the queue partition. 

If the driver doesn't support high memory IO (as currently very few hardware
RAID controller drivers appear to do), bounce buffers must be allocated for most
IO operations.

Normally the alloc_bounce_page() and alloc_bounce-bh() functions work 
as follows (pseudocode):

    page = get_lowmem_page ();
    if (page) return page;
    wakeup_bdflush (); 

    for (;;) {
        page = get_emergency_page ();
        if (page) return page;
        run_task_queue (tq_disk);
        yield (); 
    }

With the "highmemspeed" patch, the code tries to allocate from the "emergency
pool" first unless it is more then 1/2 empty:


    for (n = 0; ; n++) {
        if ((n == 0) && 
            (free_emergency_pages < emergency_pool_size/2))
                page = get_lowmem_page ();
        if (page) return page;
        wakeup_bdflush (); 

        page = get_emergency_page ();
        if (page) return page;
        run_task_queue (tq_disk);
        yield ();
        first;
    }

The problem with this approach is that unless the emergency pool is more then
1/2 empty, wakeup_bdflush() will be called every time alloc_bounce_page() or
alloc_bounce_bh() is called. This is pointless
because calling wakeup_bdflush() only makes sense if the allocation from low
memory wasn't successful.

I have collected some statistics and found that in our case this happens ab

Simply changing the above code to
[...]
        if ((n == 0) && 
            (free_emergency_pages < emergency_pool_size/2)) |
                page = get_lowmem_page ();
                if (page) return page;
                wakeup_bdflush (); 
        }
[...]
(i.e. calling wakeup_bdflush() only if the low memory allocation was tried and
wasn't successful) the solves the problem. 

I will soon attach a patch fixing the problem.

[ I have simplified stuff a little bit here. Actually 2.4.9-e.25 contains
several more patches (in particular "vmfixes9") which change these allocation
routines again. The basic argument - wakeup_bdflush() called for no reason -
remains valid, though. ]

To illustrate my point, hre are the postal results with 2.4.9-e.25
(1GB memory, queue partition on a DAC960 partition):

time,messages,data(K),errors,connections
15:12,1428,110108,0,89,0
15:13,1471,108634,0,84,0

And here the same with my patch applied:

time,messages,data(K),errors,connections
15:38,3858,286641,0,252,0
15:39,3607,275018,0,242,0

and here withput my patch, but with only 512MB memory:

time,messages,data(K),errors,connections
17:58,3644,268730,0,242,0
17:59,3348,250146,0,222,0

The most relevant figure ist the first one after the time of day
("messages", i.e. delivered messages per minute).
It can be seen to be a factor of ~2.5 low with the 2.4.9-e.25 kernel
and 1GB memory.