Re: [tor-relays] Tor relay occasionally maxing out CPU usage

[William Kane <ttallink@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Another thing, from the change-log:

- Update the message logged on relays when DirCache is disabled.
  Since 0.3.3.5-rc, authorities require DirCache (V2Dir) for the
  Guard flag. Fixes bug 24312; bugfix on 0.3.3.5-rc.

If I understand this correctly, my relay would no longer be a Guard if
I choose to disable DirCache in order to prevent Tor from hogging my
CPU?

From the code that I have seen, simply not setting the directory port
does not stop the relay from caching / compressing diffs.

Or has this been changed more recently?

Not being a guard would honestly suck, and being a guard but with
limited bandwidth due to Tor hogging the CPU also sucks.

Any ideas on what to do?

2020-05-19 13:43 GMT, William Kane <ttallink@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Dear Alexander,
>
> I have added 'Log [dirserv]info notice stdout' to my configuration and
> will be monitoring the system closely.
>
> Tor was also upgraded to version 0.4.3.5, and the linux kernel was
> upgraded to version 5.6.13 but I do not think this will change
> anything.
>
> Expect a follow-up within the next 12 hours.
>
> William
>
> 2020-05-18 1:40 GMT, Alexander Færøy <ahf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>> Hello,
>>
>> On 2020/05/17 18:20, William Kane wrote:
>>> Occasionally, the CPU usage hit's 100%, and the maximum throughput
>>> drops down to around 16 Mbps from it's usual 80 Mbps. This happens
>>> randomly and not a fixed intervals which makes it pretty hard to
>>> profile.
>>
>> One of the subsystem's that I can think of that could potentially lead
>> to the problem that you are describing is our "consensus diff"
>> subsystem. The consensus diff subsystem is responsible for turning
>> consensus documents into these patch(1)-like diffs that clients can
>> fetch without the need to transfer the whole consensus for each minor
>> change.
>>
>> The subsystem also takes care of compression, which includes LZMA, which
>> is a beast when it comes to burning CPU cycles.
>>
>>> No abnormal entries in the log files.
>>
>> I suspect you're logging at `notice` log-level, which is the reasonable
>> thing to do. We need to log at slightly higher granularity to discover
>> the problem here.
>>
>> Could I get you to add `Log [dirserv]info notice syslog` to your
>> `torrc`? This line makes Tor log everything at notice log-level (the
>> default), to the system logger, except for the directory server
>> subsystem, which will be logged at `info` log-level instead. The code
>> responsible for generating consensus diffs uses the `dirserv` for
>> logging purposes.
>>
>> If the CPU spike happens right after a log message that says something
>> in the line of "The most recent XXX consensus is valid-after XXX. We
>> have diffs to this consensus for XXX/XXX older XXX consensuses.
>> Generating diffs for the other XXX." then I think we have our winner.
>>
>> Please remember to remove the `info` log-level when the experiment is
>> over :-)
>>
>> I'm curious what you figure out here. Let me know if you need any help.
>>
>> All the best,
>> Alex.
>>
>> --
>> Alexander Færøy
>> _______________________________________________
>> tor-relays mailing list
>> tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
>>
>
_______________________________________________
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays