What is the throughput of Google File System? - performance

What is the throughput of Google File System?

http://labs.google.com/papers/gfs-sosp2003.pdf
Page 11, under 6.1.2 Writes has some figures of throughput. Not sure if that's what you're looking for.

Here is an article about it
FTA:
Cluster A B
Read Rate - last minute 583 MB/s 380 MB/s
Read Rate - last hour 562 MB/s 384 MB/s
Read Rate - since restart 589 MB/s 49 MB/s
Write Rate - last minute 1 MB/s 101 MB/s
Write Rate - last hour 2 MB/s 117 MB/s
Write Rate - since restart 25 MB/s 13 MB/s
Master Ops - last minute 325 Op/s 533 Op/s
Master Ops - last hour 381 Op/s 518 Op/s
Master Ops - since restart 202 Op/s 347 Op/s

Related

Can a large amount of arguments deteriorate performance of a ksh or bash script?

I'm running a KornShell script which originally has 61 input arguments:
./runOS.ksh 2.8409 24 40 0.350 0.62917 8 1 2 1.00000 4.00000 0.50000 0.00 1 1 4900.00 1.500 -0.00800 1.500 -0.00800 1 100.00000 20.00000 4 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 90 2 0.10000 0.10000 0.10000 1.500 -0.008 3.00000 0.34744 1.500 -0.008 1.500 -0.008 0.15000 0.21715 1.500 -0.008 0.00000 1 1.334 0 0.243 0.073 0.642 0.0229 38.0 0.03071 2 0 15 -1 20 1
I only vary 6 of them. Would it make a difference in performance if I fixed the remaining 55 arguments inside the script and just call the variable ones, say:
./runOS.ksh 2.8409 24 40 0.350 0.62917 8
If anyone has a quick/general answer to this, it will be highly appreciated, since it might take me a long time to fix the 55 extra arguments inside the script and I'm afraid it won't change anything.
There's no performance impact, as you're asking, but I see other threads:
What is the commandline limitation for your system? You mention 61 input parameters, some of them having a length of 8 characters. If the number of input parameters increases, you might have problems with the maximum command length.
Are you performing 440 million scripts? That's too much, far too much. You need to consider why you're doing this: you mention needing to wait ±153 days for their execution to finish, which is far too much (and unpredictable).

strace'ing/profiling a bash script

I'm currently trying to benchmark a bash script in 4 different versions. Each one does a giant rsync job and it usually takes a very long time to finish. There are many steps in the bash script which involves setting up and tearing down the environment to rsync to.
However, when I ran strace on the bash scripts, I get surprisingly short results, which leads me to believe that strace is not actually tracing the time waiting for a command like rsync(which might be spawned in a subshell and is completely not recorded by rsync), or, it's waking up intermittently and sleep for another amount of time of which strace is not counting. Here's a snippet:
% time seconds usecs/call calls errors syscall
------ ----------- ----------- --------- --------- ----------------
99.98 12.972555 120116 108 52 wait4
0.01 0.000751 13 56 clone
0.00 0.000380 1 553 rt_sigprocmask
0.00 0.000303 2 197 85 stat
0.00 0.000274 2 134 read
0.00 0.000223 19 12 open
0.00 0.000190 48 4 getdents
0.00 0.000110 1 82 8 close
0.00 0.000110 1 153 rt_sigaction
0.00 0.000084 1 61 getegid
0.00 0.000074 4 19 write
So what tools can I use that are similar to strace, OR, maybe I'm missing some type of recursive flag in strace to find out correctly where my bash script is waiting on?
I would like something along the lines of:
% time command
------ --------
... rsync
... ls
Any suggestions would be appreciated. Thank you!

apache server reached MaxClients setting, consider raising the MaxClients setting

I am running centos 5.5 with 768mb ram. i keep getting server reached MaxClients setting, consider raising the MaxClients setting in the logs also apache runs really slow. when i look at cacti graphs it shows the server is not even using all the resources.. here is the current configuration
<IfModule prefork.c>
StartServers 8
MinSpareServers 5
MaxSpareServers 10
ServerLimit 1024
MaxClients 768
MaxRequestsPerChild 4000
</IfModule>
<IfModule worker.c>
StartServers 2
MaxClients 150
MinSpareThreads 25
MaxSpareThreads 75
ThreadsPerChild 25
MaxRequestsPerChild 0
</IfModule>
free -m
total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 768 352 415 0 0 37
-/+ buffers/cache: 315 452
Swap: 0 0 0
top - 11:03:54 up 41 days, 11:53, 1 user, load average: 0.05, 0.03, 0.00
Tasks: 35 total, 1 running, 34 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
Cpu(s): 0.0%us, 0.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 99.7%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.3%st
Mem: 786432k total, 389744k used, 396688k free, 0k buffers
Swap: 0k total, 0k used, 0k free, 38284k cached
I have tried the following but the server responds very slowly
<IfModule worker.c>
#StartServers 2
#MaxClients 150
#MinSpareThreads 25
#MaxSpareThreads 75
#ThreadsPerChild 25
#MaxRequestsPerChild 0
StartServers 20
MaxClients 1024
ServerLimit 1024
MinSpareThreads 128
MaxSpareThreads 768
ThreadsPerChild 64
MaxRequestsPerChild 0
</IfModule>
free -m
total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 768 324 443 0 0 37
-/+ buffers/cache: 286 481
Swap: 0 0 0
#regilero
I have updated to
<IfModule prefork.c>
StartServers 12
MinSpareServers 12
MaxSpareServers 12
MaxClients 50
MaxRequestsPerChild 300
</IfModule>
using top i see
Tasks: 36 total, 1 running, 35 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
Cpu(s): 0.0%us, 0.3%sy, 0.0%ni, 99.7%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st
Mem: 786432k total, 613180k used, 173252k free, 0k buffers
Swap: 0k total, 0k used, 0k free, 76488k cached
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
1 root 20 0 10364 92 60 S 0.0 0.0 1:09.53 init
2 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 kthreadd/808
3 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 khelper/808
124 root 16 -4 12620 8 4 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 udevd
533 root 20 0 95504 5692 228 S 0.0 0.7 4:02.94 memcached
546 root 20 0 5924 332 276 S 0.0 0.0 6:54.51 syslogd
557 root 20 0 101m 1456 868 S 0.0 0.2 13:18.64 snmpd
570 root 20 0 62640 316 208 S 0.0 0.0 2:39.56 sshd
579 root 20 0 21656 24 20 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 xinetd
589 root 20 0 12072 12 8 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.05 mysqld_safe
940 mysql 20 0 559m 164m 3832 S 0.3 21.5 209:33.88 mysqld
1015 root 20 0 20880 200 132 S 0.0 0.0 0:10.48 crond
1023 root 20 0 46748 4 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 saslauthd
1024 root 20 0 46748 4 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 saslauthd
3605 root 20 0 62832 2168 636 S 0.0 0.3 0:02.58 sendmail
3613 smmsp 20 0 57712 1648 504 S 0.0 0.2 0:00.01 sendmail
17610 root 20 0 85932 3312 2600 S 0.0 0.4 0:00.02 sshd
17612 mcmap 20 0 86072 1760 1012 S 0.0 0.2 0:00.17 sshd
17613 mcmap 20 0 12076 1656 1292 S 0.0 0.2 0:00.01 bash
17637 root 20 0 45052 1432 1120 S 0.0 0.2 0:00.00 su
17638 root 20 0 12180 1800 1324 S 0.0 0.2 0:00.08 bash
17740 root 20 0 246m 9264 4516 S 0.0 1.2 0:00.19 httpd
18264 apache 20 0 282m 43m 4940 S 0.0 5.7 0:00.56 httpd
18514 apache 20 0 279m 40m 4832 S 0.0 5.3 0:01.47 httpd
18518 apache 20 0 273m 36m 4396 S 0.0 4.7 0:00.45 httpd
18528 apache 20 0 251m 13m 3660 S 0.0 1.8 0:00.41 httpd
18529 apache 20 0 278m 40m 4340 S 0.0 5.3 0:00.99 httpd
18530 apache 20 0 278m 40m 4268 S 0.0 5.3 0:00.67 httpd
18548 apache 20 0 272m 33m 3516 S 0.0 4.4 0:00.28 httpd
18552 apache 20 0 280m 42m 3684 S 0.0 5.5 0:00.48 httpd
18553 apache 20 0 271m 33m 3768 S 0.0 4.3 0:00.45 httpd
18555 apache 20 0 274m 36m 3672 S 0.0 4.7 0:00.58 httpd
18572 apache 20 0 247m 9020 2856 S 0.0 1.1 0:00.01 httpd
18578 apache 20 0 280m 42m 3684 S 0.0 5.6 0:00.76 httpd
18589 apache 20 0 246m 5452 676 S 0.0 0.7 0:00.00 httpd
18588 root 20 0 12624 1216 932 R 0.0 0.2 0:00.06
free -m
total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 768 578 189 0 0 74
-/+ buffers/cache: 504 263
Swap: 0 0 0
Just added current picture of cacti result last 4 hours. busy periods are monday tuesday. So i will wait till next week to see further results of the config change. but it looks like an improvement as before i only had max 10 threads available. Looking at this do you think i can make more improvment?
free -m
total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 768 619 148 0 0 49
-/+ buffers/cache: 570 197
Swap: 0 0 0
NEW TEST
On a 2GB Ram VPS box i have now set prefork to
StartServers 20
MinSpareServers 20
MaxSpareServers 20
ServerLimit 256
MaxClients 256
MaxRequestsPerChild 4000
today morning my memcache server died from
Nov 20 09:28:40 vps22899094 kernel: Out of memory: Kill process 12517 (memcached) score 81 or sacrifice child
Nov 20 09:28:40 vps22899094 kernel: Killed process 12517, UID 497, (memcached) total-vm:565252kB, anon-rss:42940kB, file-rss:44kB
What should the optimal values be to set in apache?
#/etc/sysconfig/memcached
PORT="11211"
USER="memcached"
MAXCONN="1024"
CACHESIZE="1024"
OPTIONS="-l 127.0.0.1"
/etc/my.cnf
[mysqld]
datadir=/var/lib/mysql
socket=/var/lib/mysql/mysql.sock
user=mysql
# Disabling symbolic-links is recommended to prevent assorted security risks
symbolic-links=0
bind-address=127.0.0.1
#script
thread_concurrency=2
query_cache_size = 16M
query_cache_type=1
query_cache_limit=5M
# MyISAM #
#key-buffer-size = 32M
#myisam-recover = FORCE,BACKUP
# SAFETY #
#max-allowed-packet = 16M
#max-connect-errors = 1000000
# CACHES AND LIMITS #
tmp-table-size = 32M
max-heap-table-size = 32M
#query-cache-type = 0
#query-cache-size = 0
max-connections = 50
thread-cache-size = 16
#open-files-limit = 65535
#table-definition-cache = 1024
#table-open-cache = 2048
# INNODB #
#innodb-flush-method = O_DIRECT
#innodb-log-files-in-group = 2
#innodb-log-file-size = 5M
#innodb-flush-log-at-trx-commit = 1
#innodb-file-per-table = 1
#innodb-buffer-pool-size = 921M
# LOGGING #
log-error = /var/log/mysqld.log
log-queries-not-using-indexes = 1
slow-query-log = 1
slow-query-log-file = /var/log/mysqld-slow.log
[mysqld_safe]
log-error=/var/log/mysqld.log
pid-file=/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.pid
When you use Apache with mod_php apache is enforced in prefork mode, and not worker. As, even if php5 is known to support multi-thread, it is also known that some php5 libraries are not behaving very well in multithreaded environments (so you would have a locale call on one thread altering locale on other php threads, for example).
So, if php is not running in cgi way like with php-fpm you have mod_php inside apache and apache in prefork mode.
On your tests you have simply commented the prefork settings and increased the worker settings, what you now have is default values for prefork settings and some altered values for the shared ones :
StartServers 20
MinSpareServers 5
MaxSpareServers 10
MaxClients 1024
MaxRequestsPerChild 0
This means you ask apache to start with 20 process, but you tell it that, if there is more than 10 process doing nothing it should reduce this number of children, to stay between 5 and 10 process available. The increase/decrease speed of apache is 1 per minute. So soon you will fall back to the classical situation where you have a fairly low number of free available apache processes (average 2). The average is low because usually you have something like 5 available process, but as soon as the traffic grows they're all used, so there's no process available as apache is very slow in creating new forks. This is certainly increased by the fact your PHP requests seems to be quite long, they do not finish early and the apache forks are not released soon enough to treat another request.
See on the last graphic the small amount of green before the red peak? If you could graph this on a 1 minute basis instead of 5 minutes you would see that this green amount was not big enough to take the incoming traffic without any error message.
Now you set 1024 MaxClients. I guess the cacti graph are not taken after this configuration modification, because with such modification, when no more process are available, apache would continue to fork new children, with a limit of 1024 busy children. Take something like 20MB of RAM per child (or maybe you have a big memory_limit in PHP and allows something like 64MB or 256MB and theses PHP requests are really using more RAM), maybe a DB server... your server is now slowing down because you have only 768MB of RAM. Maybe when apache is trying to initiate the first 20 children you already reach the available RAM limit.
So. a classical way of handling that is to check the amount of memory used by an apache fork (make some top commands while it is running), then find how many parallel request you can handle with this amount of RAM (that mean parallel apache children in prefork mode). Let's say it's 12, for example. Put this number in apache mpm settings this way:
<IfModule prefork.c>
StartServers 12
MinSpareServers 12
MaxSpareServers 12
MaxClients 12
MaxRequestsPerChild 300
</IfModule>
That means you do not move the number of fork while traffic increase or decrease, because you always want to use all the RAM and be ready for traffic peaks. The 300 means you recyclate each fork after 300 requests, it's better than 0, it means you will not have potential memory leaks issues. MaxClients is set to 12 25 or 50 which is more than 12 to handle the ListenBacklog queue, which can enqueue some requests, you may take a bigger queue, but you would get some timeouts maybe (removed this strange sentende, I can't remember why I said that, if more than 12 requests are incoming the next one will be pushed in the Backlog queue, but you should set MaxClient to your targeted number of processes).
And yes, that means you cannot handle more than 12 parallel requests.
If you want to handle more requests:
buy some more RAM
try to use apache in worker mode, but remove mod_php and use php as a parallel daemon with his own pooler settings (this is called php-fpm), connect it with fastcgi. Note that you will certainly need to buy some RAM to allow a big number of parallel php-fpm process, but maybe less than with mod_php
Reduce the time spent in your php process. From your cacti graphs you have to potential problems: a real traffic peak around 11:25-11:30 or some php code getting very slow. Fast requests will reduce the number of parallel requests.
If your problem is really traffic peaks, solutions could be available with caches, like a proxy-cache server. If the problem is a random slowness in PHP then... it's an application problem, do you do some HTTP query to another site from PHP, for example?
And finally, as stated by #Jan Vlcinsky you could try nginx, where php will only be available as php-fpm. If you cannot buy RAM and must handle a big traffic that's definitively desserve a test.
Update: About internal dummy connections (if it's your problem, but maybe not).
Check this link and this previous answer. This is 'normal', but if you do not have a simple virtualhost theses requests are maybe hitting your main heavy application, generating slow http queries and preventing regular users to acces your apache processes. They are generated on graceful reload or children managment.
If you do not have a simple basic "It works" default Virtualhost prevent theses requests on your application by some rewrites:
RewriteCond %{HTTP_USER_AGENT} ^.*internal\ dummy\ connection.*$ [NC]
RewriteRule .* - [F,L]
Update:
Having only one Virtualhost does not protect you from internal dummy connections, it is worst, you are sure now that theses connections are made on your unique Virtualhost. So you should really avoid side effects on your application by using the rewrite rules.
Reading your cacti graphics, it seems your apache is not in prefork mode bug in worker mode. Run httpd -l or apache2 -l on debian, and check if you have worker.c or prefork.c. If you are in worker mode you may encounter some PHP problems in your application, but you should check the worker settings, here is an example:
<IfModule worker.c>
StartServers 3
MaxClients 500
MinSpareThreads 75
MaxSpareThreads 250
ThreadsPerChild 25
MaxRequestsPerChild 300
</IfModule>
You start 3 processes, each containing 25 threads (so 3*25=75 parallel requests available by default), you allow 75 threads doing nothing, as soon as one thread is used a new process is forked, adding 25 more threads. And when you have more than 250 threads doing nothing (10 processes) some process are killed. You must adjust theses settings with your memory. Here you allow 500 parallel process (that's 20 process of 25 threads). Your usage is maybe more:
<IfModule worker.c>
StartServers 2
MaxClients 250
MinSpareThreads 50
MaxSpareThreads 150
ThreadsPerChild 25
MaxRequestsPerChild 300
</IfModule>
Did you consider using nginx (or other event based web server) instead of apache?
nginx shall allow higher number of connections and consume much less resources (as it is event based and does not create separate process per connection). Anyway, you will need some processes, doing real work (like WSGI servers or so) and if they stay on the same server as the front end web server, you only shift the performance problem to a bit different place.
Latest apache version shall allow similar solution (configure it in event based manner), but this is not my area of expertise.
Here's an approach that could resolve your problem, and if not would help with troubleshooting.
Create a second Apache virtual server identical to the current one
Send all "normal" user traffic to the original virtual server
Send special or long-running traffic to the new virtual server
Special or long-running traffic could be report-generation, maintenance ops or anything else you don't expect to complete in <<1 second. This can happen serving APIs, not just web pages.
If your resource utilization is low but you still exceed MaxClients, the most likely answer is you have new connections arriving faster than they can be serviced. Putting any slow operations on a second virtual server will help prove if this is the case. Use the Apache access logs to quantify the effect.
I recommend to use bellow formula suggested on Apache:
MaxClients = (total RAM - RAM for OS - RAM for external programs) / (RAM per httpd process)
Find my script here which is running on Rhel 6.7. you can made change according to your OS.
#!/bin/bash
echo "HostName=`hostname`"
#Formula
#MaxClients . (RAM - size_all_other_processes)/(size_apache_process)
total_httpd_processes_size=`ps -ylC httpd --sort:rss | awk '{ sum += $9 } END { print sum }'`
#echo "total_httpd_processes_size=$total_httpd_processes_size"
total_http_processes_count=`ps -ylC httpd --sort:rss | wc -l`
echo "total_http_processes_count=$total_http_processes_count"
AVG_httpd_process_size=$(expr $total_httpd_processes_size / $total_http_processes_count)
echo "AVG_httpd_process_size=$AVG_httpd_process_size"
total_httpd_process_size_MB=$(expr $AVG_httpd_process_size / 1024)
echo "total_httpd_process_size_MB=$total_httpd_process_size_MB"
total_pttpd_used_size=$(expr $total_httpd_processes_size / 1024)
echo "total_pttpd_used_size=$total_pttpd_used_size"
total_RAM_size=`free -m |grep Mem |awk '{print $2}'`
echo "total_RAM_size=$total_RAM_size"
total_used_size=`free -m |grep Mem |awk '{print $3}'`
echo "total_used_size=$total_used_size"
size_all_other_processes=$(expr $total_used_size - $total_pttpd_used_size)
echo "size_all_other_processes=$size_all_other_processes"
remaining_memory=$(($total_RAM_size - $size_all_other_processes))
echo "remaining_memory=$remaining_memory"
MaxClients=$((($total_RAM_size - $size_all_other_processes) / $total_httpd_process_size_MB))
echo "MaxClients=$MaxClients"
exit

User processes in D-state leads to a watchdog reset using Linux 2.6.24 and arm processor

Most of the user space processes are ending up in D-state after the unit runs for around 3-4 days, the unit is running on ARM processor. From the top o/p we can see that processes that are in D-state are waiting on system calls "page_fault" and "squashfs_readpage". Utimately this leads to a watchdog reset. The processes that go into D-sate would take unusually long time to recover.
Following is the top o/p when the system ends up in trouble:
top - 12:00:11 up 3 days, 2:40, 3 users, load average: 2.77, 1.90, 1.72
Tasks: 250 total, 3 running, 238 sleeping, 0 stopped, 9 zombie
Cpu(s): 10.0% us, 75.5% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.0% id, 10.3% wa, 0.0% hi, 4.2% si
Mem: 191324k total, 188896k used, 2428k free, 2548k buffers
Swap: 0k total, 0k used, 0k free, 87920k cached
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
1003 root 20 0 225m 31m 4044 S 15.2 16.7 0:21.91 user_process_1
3745 root 20 0 80776 9476 3196 **D** 9.0 5.0 1:31.79 user_process_2
129 root 15 -5 0 0 0 S 7.4 0.0 0:27.65 **mtdblockd**
4624 root 20 0 3640 256 160 **D** 6.5 0.1 0:00.20 GetCounters_cus
3 root 15 -5 0 0 0 S 3.2 0.0 43:38.73 ksoftirqd/0
31363 root 20 0 2356 1176 792 R 2.6 0.6 40:09.58 top
347 root 30 10 0 0 0 S 1.9 0.0 28:56.04 **jffs2_gcd_mtd3**
1169 root 20 0 225m 31m 4044 S 1.9 16.7 39:31.36 user_process_1
604 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 1.6 0.0 27:22.76 user_process_3
1069 root -23 0 225m 31m 4044 S 1.3 16.7 20:45.39 user_process_1
4545 root 20 0 3640 564 468 S 1.0 0.3 0:00.08 GetCounters_cus
64 root 15 -5 0 0 0 **D** 0.3 0.0 0:00.83 **kswapd0**
969 root 20 0 20780 1856 1376 S 0.3 1.0 14:18.89 user_process_4
973 root 20 0 225m 31m 4044 S 0.3 16.7 3:35.74 user_process_1
1070 root -23 0 225m 31m 4044 S 0.3 16.7 16:41.04 user_process_1
1151 root -81 0 225m 31m 4044 S 0.3 16.7 23:13.05 user_process_1
1152 root -99 0 225m 31m 4044 S 0.3 16.7 8:48.47 user_process_1
One more interesting observation is that when the system lands up in this problem, we can consistently see "mtdblockd" process running in the top o/p. We have swap disabled on this unit. there is no apparent memory leak in the unit.
Any idea what could be the possible reasons, the processes are stuck in D-sates?
D-state means the processes are stuck in the kernel in a TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE sleep, this is unlikely to be bugs in the Squashfs error handling code because if a process exited Squashfs holding a mutex, the system would quickly grind to a halt as other processes entered Squashfs and slept forever waiting for the mutex. You would also see a low load average/system time as most processes would be sleeping. Furthermore there is no evidence Squashfs has hit any I/O errors.
Load average (2.77) and system time (75.5%) is extremely high, coupled with the fact a lot of processes are in Squashfs_readpage (which is completing but slow), indicates the system is thrashing. There is too little memory and the system is spending all it's time constantly (re-)demand paging pages from disk. This will account for the fact a lot of processes are in Squashfs_readpage, system time is extremely high because the system is spending most of its time in Squashfs in the CPU intensive task of decompression. The other processes are stuck in Squashfs waiting on the decompressor mutex (only one process can be decompressing at a time because the decompressor state is shared).

Analyzing iostat output

I'm suffering performance issues with my application, and one of my suspects is excessive IO.
iostat shows rate of 10K blocks written per second. How can I tell if this is a lot or not? How can I know the limit of the specific machine and disk?
Edit:Following Elliot's request:
iostat output:
avg-cpu: %user %nice %system %iowait %steal %idle
16.39 0.00 0.52 11.43 0.00 71.66
Device: tps Blk_read/s Blk_wrtn/s Blk_read Blk_wrtn
cciss/c0d0 315.20 0.00 10341.80 0 51709
uptime:
2:08am up 17 days 17:26, 5 users, load average: 9.13, 9.32, 8.73
top:
top - 02:10:02 up 17 days, 17:27, 5 users, load average: 8.89, 9.18, 8.72
Tasks: 202 total, 2 running, 200 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
Cpu(s): 5.9%us, 0.7%sy, 0.0%ni, 90.5%id, 2.9%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st
Mem: 96556M total, 15930M used, 80626M free, 221M buffers
Swap: 196615M total, 93M used, 196522M free, 2061M cached
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
20027 root 16 0 10.5g 9.8g 12m S 74 10.4 2407:55 /usr/intel/pkgs/java/1.6.0.31-64/jre//bin/java -server -X
Thanks
I can tell you from experience that's a very high block write rate for most systems. However, your system could be perfectly capable of handling that--depends on what kind of hardware you have. What's important is your server load figure and the iowait percentage. If your server load is high (i.e., higher than the number of cores on your system) and your load largely consists of iowait, then you have a problem.
Could you share with us the full output of iostat, uptime, and a snapshot of top -c output while your application is running?
Perspective:
If it's spinning disk, that's a high value.
If it's an SSD or a SAN with a write cache, that's reasonable.
Use iostat -x for wide and extended metrics:
[xxx#xxxxxxxxxx]$ iostat -x
Linux 2.6.32-358.6.2.el6.x86_64 (boxname.goes.here) 12/12/2013 _x86_64_ (24 CPU)
avg-cpu: %user %nice %system %iowait %steal %idle
0.57 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.00 99.21
Device: rrqm/s wrqm/s r/s w/s rsec/s wsec/s avgrq-sz avgqu-sz await svctm %util
sda 0.06 28.38 0.04 3.99 0.99 259.15 64.58 0.01 2.11 0.55 0.22
The %util is your friend. If you look at iostat.c (see it at: http://code.google.com/p/tester-higkoo/source/browse/trunk/Tools/iostat/iostat.c) you can see it calculates this percentage by looking at the amount of time (in processor ticks) spent doing IO versus the total number of ticks that have passed. In other words, the PERCENTAGE-UTIL is the percent of time the IO was in a busy state.

Resources