From owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Fri Jul 24 00:40:33 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEDBF9A9860 for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 00:40:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: from mail.soaustin.net (mail.soaustin.net [66.135.54.68]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFE251983; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 00:40:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id B9AD05607A; Thu, 23 Jul 2015 19:40:26 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 19:40:26 -0500 From: Mark Linimon To: Michelle Sullivan Cc: Glen Barber , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, herbert@oslo.ath.cx, Jason Unovitch Subject: Re: 10.2-Beta i386..what's wrong..? Message-ID: <20150724004026.GA1370@lonesome.com> References: <55B17B7A.4080402@gmail.com> <20150723234805.GK84931@FreeBSD.org> <55B18488.9060602@sorbs.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <55B18488.9060602@sorbs.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 00:40:34 -0000 On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 02:19:20AM +0200, Michelle Sullivan wrote: > Why is zfs on i386 so hard? zfs is a resource hog. i386 is not able to handle the demand as well as amd64. I have never, ever, heard of anyone who has a deep understanding of zfs on FreeBSD recommend anything other than amd64. (Note: I am not such a person, so I am simply reporting my understanding.) FWIW, I tried it once. Once. After spending a few days inspecting all the bullet holes in my feet, I moved it off that i386 machine and all the bullet holes healed up. tl;dr: zfs/i386 Not Recommended. But YMMV. mcl