Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 22 Jan 2020 20:07:04 -0600
From:      Mike Karels <mike@karels.net>
To:        Ben Woods <woodsb02@gmail.com>
Cc:        Conrad Meyer <cem@freebsd.org>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org>, Philip Paeps <philip@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Minimum memory for ZFS (was Re: svn commit: r356758 - in head/usr.sbin/bsdinstall: . scripts)
Message-ID:  <202001230207.00N274xO042659@mail.karels.net>
In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 23 Jan 2020 08:06:59 %2B0800. <CAOc73CDhPsUkt6aJLSua=9OG5gh_z52qRV0GGMtNaX2=n_5WmQ@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I took the liberty of changing the subject line to make it stand out a
bit more.

Ben wrote:

> On Sat, 18 Jan 2020 at 09:16, Mike Karels <mike@karels.net> wrote:

> > > On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 at 08:21, Ben Woods <woodsb02@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > Perhaps we could simply include a message on that bsdinstall
> > partitioning
> > > > mode selection screen that UFS is recommended on systems with < 4 =
Gb
> > RAM?
> > > >
> >
> > > I have uploaded a diff for this here: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D2=
3224
> >
> > > Please let me know your thoughts (comments in the phabricator review
> > would
> > > be best).
> >
> > I think this needs more discussion, preferably on this list.  I am not
> > convinced that systems with as little as 4 GB should use ZFS.  Convent=
ional
> > wisdom on the FreeNAS mailing list says that 8 GB is required for ZFS,
> > and FreeNAS no longer includes UFS as an option.  Conrad suggested a
> > cutoff of 16 GB; I am happier with 16 GB than 4 GB as a cutoff.  Also,
> > there was mention of auto-tuning for smaller systems; I don't think th=
at
> > has materialized yet.  I'm not sure how plausible that is without know=
ing
> > the workload.  I use ZFS on a workstation/server with 64 GB that runs =
4
> > bhyve guests that do things like buildworld.  ZFS wants 63 GB for arc_=
max;
> > needless to say, I have a tunable set to a much lower value.  If tunin=
g
> > is required, it is unclear that ZFS is a good default.
> >
> >                 Mike
> >


> Hi everyone,

> Before I commit phabricator review D23224, is there any final comments?

> Particularly on these 2 lines of help-text:
> msg_partitioning_zfs_help=3D"ZFS is recommended if you have at least 4GB=
 RAM"
> msg_partitioning_ufs_help=3D"UFS is recommended if you have less than 4G=
B of
> RAM"

> There is some disagree about what these 2 recommendations should be.

> 4GB was recommended by: imp, emaste, philip, eugen, dteske
> 8GB was recommended by: mike
> 16GB was recommended by: cem

> The 4GB limit seems to have the best consensus, however there was some
> debate about whether ZFS is recommended on a system with 4GB, or only
> systems with MORE THAN 4GB.

I don't remember what everyone else wrote, but IIRC, Devin said that if
you use ZFS with 4 GB, you will soon end up with a dozen tunables set.
That doesn't sound like a recommendation for 4 GB.

> As for the ZFS auto-tuning, I see that as being a separate discussion
> (which could ultimately change this recommendation, but shouldn't preven=
t
> us from committing this help text now).

Agreed, but the lack of tuning should factor into the current recommendati=
on.

		Mike

> Regards,
> Ben



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?202001230207.00N274xO042659>