Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 11:04:16 -0800 (PST) From: Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com> To: Ted Faber <faber@ISI.EDU> Cc: "Michael C . Wu" <keichii@peorth.iteration.net>, fs@FreeBSD.ORG, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: tuning a VERY heavily (30.0) loaded server Message-ID: <200103201904.f2KJ4GP95937@earth.backplane.com> References: <20010320111144.A51924@peorth.iteration.net> <20010320092717.R29888@fw.wintelcom.net> <20010320113818.B52586@peorth.iteration.net> <20010320094837.B1284@ted.isi.edu> <20010320120314.D52586@peorth.iteration.net> <20010320102156.C1284@ted.isi.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
:> SWAP is never touched. :)
:>
:> last pid: 23395; load averages: 2.08, 2.92, 3.60 up 0+01:29:58 02:03:27
:> 1529 processes:24 running, 1505 sleeping
:> CPU states: 40.5% user, 0.0% nice, 46.4% system, 1.1% interrupt, 12.0% idle
:> Mem: 705M Active, 1369M Inact, 332M Wired, 99M Cache, 265M Buf, 7504K Free
:> Swap: 512M Total, 512M Free
:
:A couple other people have mentioned that this is your swap load when
:the machine's quiet. MFS can exhaust your swap quickly, and if you
:scale these load numbers up by a factor of 10, I think you're going to
:touch swap. (Even here you're already down to 7M free mem.)
That is almost certainly what is occuring. Since swap is otherwise not
being used much, I'm going to retract my '3G of swap' recommendation
(though if you ever repartition your disks I would still do it).
You don't need 3G of swap, the 512M is fine as long as you scrap MFS.
-Matt
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200103201904.f2KJ4GP95937>