Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 6 Nov 2007 11:20:34 +0100
From:      Borja Marcos <BORJAMAR@SARENET.ES>
To:        Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, Niki Denev <nike_d@cytexbg.com>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: ZFS kmem_map too small.
Message-ID:  <A9A24A97-DBB7-42E2-BAA6-4D6CCB84E67E@SARENET.ES>
In-Reply-To: <20071106100015.GB5268@garage.freebsd.pl>
References:  <20071005000046.GC92272@garage.freebsd.pl> <20071008121523.GM2327@garage.freebsd.pl> <20071105215035.GC26730@heff.fud.org.nz> <2e77fc10711051531k41e7224dq6aaedb35cad8d9f2@mail.gmail.com> <6214AB9C-9F9B-4B9D-8B05-0B3DF5F6C16D@SARENET.ES> <20071106100015.GB5268@garage.freebsd.pl>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Nov 6, 2007, at 11:00 AM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:

>> The machine has 6 hard disks configured as a raidz2 pool.
>>
>> Please let me know of any test anyone might need.
>
> If you use vm_kern.c.2.patch, can you show loader.conf and exact  
> command
> that can provke the panic?

loader.conf:
zfs_load="YES"
vfs.root.mountfrom="zfs:pool/root"
vm.kmem_size_max="1610612736"
vm.kmem_size="1610612736"

Y bumped up the vnodes as well, as suggested at the ZFS tuning Wiki.

(/etc/sysctl.conf)
kern.maxvnodes: 400000



Anything else? (I just don't want to spam a big message with kernel  
config, etc)

I don't have a fancy config as far as I know. I'm running the latest  
FreeBSD 7-BETA, amd64,
and the machine has 4 GB of memory. It's a Dell Poweredge 2950, I'm  
using the mfi passthough
devices as disks (I don't want to use the disk array functionality it  
provides),

When I did the tests I did not have a swap partition configured, but I  
guess it shouldn't be
related (4 GB is plenty of memory). Anyway I'm going to try again with  
a swap partition today.
(_Not_ on ZFS) so that I can get a kernel dump as well.

Thank you very much,







Borja.




> ----------------

"The thing he realised about the windows was this: because they had  
been converted into openable windows after they had first been  
designed to be impregnable, they were, in fact, much less secure than  
if they had been designed as openable windows in the first place."
    Douglas Adams, "Mostly Harmless"






Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?A9A24A97-DBB7-42E2-BAA6-4D6CCB84E67E>