Bug 1932832
| Summary: | OCP Worker Node High Load crio, systemd and python Process and a lot of Zombies | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | OpenShift Container Platform | Reporter: | mchebbi <mchebbi> |
| Component: | Node | Assignee: | Sascha Grunert <sgrunert> |
| Node sub component: | CRI-O | QA Contact: | Weinan Liu <weinliu> |
| Status: | CLOSED DUPLICATE | Docs Contact: | |
| Severity: | medium | ||
| Priority: | medium | CC: | aos-bugs, miminar, sgrunert, weinliu |
| Version: | 4.6 | Keywords: | Reopened |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | 4.8.0 | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2021-05-27 07:50:32 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: | |||
|
Description
mchebbi@redhat.com
2021-02-25 11:50:30 UTC
This seems like systemd getting overwhelmed. conmon double forks and reparents to systemd, and when systemd is under load, it takes a while for it to cleanup its zombie children. Once the load reduces, it should get around to it. To speed up the process, the recommendation made in the case "The reservation may be increased..." is a good one. I don't think this is a Node bug. Increasing system reserved will help the situation. Please reopen if you disagree I think this issue is related to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1952137, so I'll continue there with my investigations. (In reply to Sascha Grunert from comment #8) > I think this issue is related to > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1952137, so I'll continue there > with my investigations. Hello, Thanks for your feedback. I will wait for your updates. Hello, Customer another outage this morning. it's a 2-3 week cycle until the problem resurfaces. he is expecting another outage in the second half on May. do you have any suggestions to prevent it from happening or fix it? can we update the customer version to 2.6.28 to test the fix [1] [1]-https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1952137 waiting for your feedback. (In reply to mchebbi from comment #10) > Hello, > > Customer another outage this morning. it's a 2-3 week cycle until the > problem resurfaces. he is expecting another outage in the second half on > May. > > do you have any suggestions to prevent it from happening or fix it? > > > can we update the customer version to 2.6.28 to test the fix [1] > > [1]-https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1952137 > > waiting for your feedback. Hey, yes please update to the latest 4.6.28 release if it becomes available. 4.6.28 should be released on Wed 2021-05-12 (In reply to Sascha Grunert from comment #12) > 4.6.28 should be released on Wed 2021-05-12 May I ask if this is a duplicate to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1952137? And I do not see any PR to the bz The Target Release is 4.8 (In reply to Weinan Liu from comment #14) > (In reply to Sascha Grunert from comment #12) > > 4.6.28 should be released on Wed 2021-05-12 > > May I ask if this is a duplicate to > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1952137? Yes I think it's a duplicate. > The Target Release is 4.8 Does this mean that the customer switched to 4.8 as next version? (In reply to Sascha Grunert from comment #15) > (In reply to Weinan Liu from comment #14) > > (In reply to Sascha Grunert from comment #12) > > > 4.6.28 should be released on Wed 2021-05-12 > > > > May I ask if this is a duplicate to > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1952137? > > Yes I think it's a duplicate. > > > > The Target Release is 4.8 > > Does this mean that the customer switched to 4.8 as next version? @Sascha, as per comment #16, I guess it not. I see 1952137 is targeting to 4.8 too, if it's duplicated issue, shall we make this one (1932832) duplicated to 1952137? Yes, let's close this one and track the issue in 1952137 *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1952137 *** |