From owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Fri Jun 5 22:57:24 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0FFE33A2C2 for ; Fri, 5 Jun 2020 22:57:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ronald-lists@klop.ws) Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.88]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49dyhg45Gpz45mY for ; Fri, 5 Jun 2020 22:57:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ronald-lists@klop.ws) Received: from smtp.greenhost.nl ([213.108.110.112]) by smarthost1.greenhost.nl with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1jhLH5-0000Jn-I3; Sat, 06 Jun 2020 00:57:21 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes To: "freebsd-fs@freebsd.org" , "Miroslav Lachman" <000.fbsd@quip.cz>, "Ronald Klop" Subject: Re: ZFS on FreeBSD 11.3 slower than 10.4 References: <1ff455a5-d111-86fa-ceb1-1021b6d9a5b6@quip.cz> <8c64cc48-7d79-7591-8bb5-67f3127463b7@quip.cz> Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2020 00:57:19 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "Ronald Klop" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Opera Mail/12.16 (FreeBSD) X-Authenticated-As-Hash: 398f5522cb258ce43cb679602f8cfe8b62a256d1 X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.samage.net X-Spam-Level: / X-Spam-Score: -0.2 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.2 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED, BAYES_50 autolearn=disabled version=3.4.2 X-Scan-Signature: 3c11394861542ed80f8a69179537bf2c X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 49dyhg45Gpz45mY X-Spamd-Bar: -- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of ronald-lists@klop.ws designates 195.190.28.88 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=ronald-lists@klop.ws X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.14 / 15.00]; TO_DN_EQ_ADDR_SOME(0.00)[]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_VERYGOOD(0.00)[195.190.28.88:from]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:195.190.28.64/27]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[klop.ws]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.99)[-0.986]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.34)[-0.339]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[195.190.28.88:from]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.02)[-1.017]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:47172, ipnet:195.190.28.0/24, country:NL]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2020 22:57:24 -0000 On Fri, 05 Jun 2020 22:57:15 +0200, Ronald Klop wrote: > On Sat, 30 May 2020 23:29:48 +0200, Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> > wrote: > >> On 2020-05-30 22:10, Ronald Klop wrote: >>> On Sat, 23 May 2020 21:44:03 +0200, Miroslav Lachman >>> <000.fbsd@quip.cz> wrote: >>> >>>> I upgraded my old desktop computer few month ago from old 10.4 based >>>> PC-BSD to stock FreeBSD 11.3. It uses single 2TB HDD 7200rpm. >>>> My problem is that upgraded version is really slow and some desktop >>>> applications are very lagging (playing multimedia is interrupted for >>>> a fraction of seconds) when there is heavy filesystem activity. >>>> >>>> I am using zfsnap2 for taking snapshots periodically and when there >>>> is enough snapshots zfs destroy is called. In this time the user >>>> experience is terrible. Starting new application like browser or even >>>> something much smaller takes minutes. The old version based on >>>> FreeBSD 10.4 behaves much better. I used the old version for years >>>> and never have problems with interrupted multimedia playback. >>>> >>>> Are there some sysctls to tune to get better desktop interactivity in >>>> heavy filesystem operations like zfs destroy, pkg check or other >>>> "find" periodic scripts? >> >> >>> How full is the disk? ZFS has poor performance if the disk becomes >>> full. >>> What is in /etc/sysctl.conf and /boot/loader.conf? >>> And did you try to boot 12.1 and did it have the same behavious? >> >> It is currently 77% full. But it is the same pool with the same >> capacity as with 10.4. >> >> I didn't try 12.1, I need to stay on 11.3 for now. >> >> ## loader.conf >> >> nvidia_load="YES" >> drm_load="YES" >> drm2_load="YES" >> iicbus_load="YES" >> vboxdrv_load="YES" >> crypto_load="YES" >> aesni_load="YES" >> geom_eli_load="YES" >> vfs.zfs.arc_max="1024M" >> zfs_load="YES" >> iicbus_load="YES" >> >> ## sysctl.conf >> >> kern.coredump=0 >> kern.maxfiles=49312 >> vfs.usermount=1 >> security.jail.allow_raw_sockets=1 >> security.jail.sysvipc_allowed=1 >> security.jail.mount_allowed=1 >> security.jail.chflags_allowed=1 >> hw.syscons.bell=0 >> kern.sched.preempt_thresh=224 >> kern.ipc.shm_allow_removed=1 >> kern.shutdown.poweroff_delay=500 >> kern.bootfile=/boot/kernel/kernel >> hw.usb.no_shutdown_wait=1 >> hw.snd.default_unit=3 >> kern.sched.interact=10 >> vfs.aio.max_aio_per_proc=256 >> vfs.aio.max_aio_queue=8192 >> vfs.aio.max_aio_queue_per_proc=1024 >> vfs.aio.max_buf_aio=64 >> net.local.stream.recvspace=65536 >> net.local.stream.sendspace=65536 >> >> >> loader.conf and sysctl.conf are the same for 10.4 and 11.3 but 11.3 is >> much much slower when it comes to heavy IO like "find" daily periodic >> scripts, zfs destroy, starting new applications etc. >> >> >> Kind regards >> Miroslav Lachman > > > I don't have anything I see which I'm sure will fix things, but you > could try to remove/comment some of these sysctls to see if 11.3 has > better defaults now. > kern.sched.preempt_thresh, kern.maxfiles, kern.sched.interact, vfs.aio.* > > What kind of machine is it? CPU, MEM? > What does gstat say about the saturation of the disk? > > Regards, > Ronald. What might also be interesting is which timer is selected. Sometimes for some reason another time-source is chosen which can influence a lot of things (like sound). Please post the output of "sysctl kern.eventtimer" and "sysctl kern.timecounter" if possible of 10.4 and 11.3. Or compare the /var/run/dmesg.boot files of 10.4 and 11.3 to see if some hardware is recognized differently. Regards, Ronald.