From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Jun  8 11:04:00 2010
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E272B1065679;
	Tue,  8 Jun 2010 11:04:00 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from petefrench@ticketswitch.com)
Received: from constantine.ticketswitch.com (constantine.ticketswitch.com
	[IPv6:2002:57e0:1d4e:1::3])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2E578FC1C;
	Tue,  8 Jun 2010 11:04:00 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from dilbert.rattatosk ([10.64.50.6] helo=dilbert.ticketswitch.com)
	by constantine.ticketswitch.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
	(Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <petefrench@ticketswitch.com>)
	id 1OLwb2-0004ij-N6; Tue, 08 Jun 2010 12:03:52 +0100
Received: from petefrench by dilbert.ticketswitch.com with local (Exim 4.71
	(FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <petefrench@ticketswitch.com>)
	id 1OLwb2-000PrL-MH; Tue, 08 Jun 2010 12:03:52 +0100
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2010 12:03:52 +0100
Message-Id: <E1OLwb2-000PrL-MH@dilbert.ticketswitch.com>
To: freebsd@jdc.parodius.com, pjd@FreeBSD.org
In-Reply-To: <20100608105912.GA2239@icarus.home.lan>
From: Pete French <petefrench@ticketswitch.com>
Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Freebsd 8.0 kmem map too small
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2010 11:04:01 -0000

> So to recap, vfs.zfs.zio.use_uma doesn't show up in sysctl output.

Errr, does for me....

$ sysctl -a | grep vfs.zfs.zio.use_uma
vfs.zfs.zio.use_uma: 1

Thats from 8.1-PRERELEASE on June 2nd.

...but all the question of sysctls is a bit of a red herring to me ?I'm
more intyerested in whether we really need to disable UMA to get stable
ZFS on amd64 right now.

-pete.