From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Tue Jan 15 17:26:47 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E31851490C33 for ; Tue, 15 Jan 2019 17:26:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from luciano@vespaperitivo.it) Received: from baobab.bilink.net (baobab.bilink.net [212.45.144.44]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B4768FD38 for ; Tue, 15 Jan 2019 17:26:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from luciano@vespaperitivo.it) Received: from baobab.bilink.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by baobab.bilink.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43fHM12PLSz1ftYs for ; Tue, 15 Jan 2019 18:26:37 +0100 (CET) Received: from hermex.mcs.it (unknown [192.168.132.214]) by baobab.bilink.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43fHM11f4dz1ftYp for ; Tue, 15 Jan 2019 18:26:37 +0100 (CET) Received: from mordeus (unknown [192.168.45.6]) by hermex.mcs.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF18659427 for ; Tue, 15 Jan 2019 18:26:36 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2019 18:26:36 +0100 From: Luciano Mannucci To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS devouring RAM in less than 2 days on FBSD 11.2 In-Reply-To: <84a3d2e071d6651e7e15afccdf29b9e0970fb056.camel@inhio.net> References: <84a3d2e071d6651e7e15afccdf29b9e0970fb056.camel@inhio.net> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.3 (GTK+ 2.24.32; amd64-portbld-freebsd11.2) X-Face: 4qPv4GNcD; h<7Q/sK>+GqF4=CR@KmnPkSmwd+#%\F`4yjKO3"C]p'z=(oWRnsYBQGM\5g:4skqQY0NnV'dM:Mm:^/_+I@a"; [-s=ogufdF"9ggQ'=y MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <43fHM11f4dz1ftYp@baobab.bilink.it> X-Virus-Scanned: PippoLillo, ClamAV using ClamSMTP X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 7B4768FD38 X-Spamd-Bar: - Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of luciano@vespaperitivo.it designates 212.45.144.44 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=luciano@vespaperitivo.it X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-1.68 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.91)[-0.905,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:212.45.144.0/24]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.88)[-0.877,0]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[4]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[vespaperitivo.it]; NEURAL_SPAM_SHORT(0.30)[0.300,0]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[baobab.bilink.it]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[44.144.45.212.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.10.0]; RCVD_NO_TLS_LAST(0.10)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:8816, ipnet:212.45.128.0/19, country:IT]; IP_SCORE(0.01)[country: IT(0.07)] X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2019 17:26:47 -0000 On Tue, 15 Jan 2019 17:38:36 +0100 ASV wrote: > my old server has 16GB of RAM and after less than 2 days 14GB are > already wired. It seems to me that ZFS ignores completely the 'arc_max' > parameter. > > Anybody is experiencing the same? No. After lowering the zfs.arc everything appears fine. Here are my parameters: vfs.zfs.arc_min: 536870912 vfs.zfs.arc_max: 1073741824 root@hermes:~ # uptime 6:22PM up 6 days, 3:51, 2 users, load averages: 0.10, 0.12, 0.11 root@hermes:~ # top Mem: 108M Active, 9934M Inact, 7570M Wired, 1565M Buf, 14G Free ARC: 2214M Total, 838M MFU, 1099M MRU, 32K Anon, 6073K Header, 272M Other 873M Compressed, 1064M Uncompressed, 1.22:1 Ratio Swap: 8192M Total, 8192M Free My version is still 11.2-RELEASE-p7. I don't think it makes a big difference... Luciano. -- /"\ /Via A. Salaino, 7 - 20144 Milano (Italy) \ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN / PHONE : +39 2 485781 FAX: +39 2 48578250 X AGAINST HTML MAIL / E-MAIL: posthamster@sublink.sublink.ORG / \ AND POSTINGS / WWW: http://www.lesassaie.IT/