Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 14:06:20 -0700 From: Artem Belevich <fbsdlist@src.cx> To: Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: zfs arc - just take it all and be good to me Message-ID: <AANLkTikDngjwH08b4QVCgZfZ_kWmZox=FtWEHZ2-Bd%2B4@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4C742C8F.2030401@icyb.net.ua> References: <20100810214418.GA28288@tolstoy.tols.org> <20100811014919.GA52992@icarus.home.lan> <20100811192537.GA44635@tolstoy.tols.org> <AANLkTin-YvEzoN-ThwwDAqn2mWFMD4-7BnP8N95EqTk0@mail.gmail.com> <20100811214302.GB44635@tolstoy.tols.org> <20100812205625.GA79515@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <20100824150035.GB99477@roberto-al.eurocontrol.fr> <20100824200527.GC11990@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <4C742C8F.2030401@icyb.net.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I've tried the change on my ZFS-only 8-stable box which has v15+metaslab patches applied and so far it seems to work OK under memory shortage. As intended ZFS does not start giving up memory until pagedaemon wakes up. I'll bang on the box some more through the week. --Artem 2010/8/24 Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua>: > on 24/08/2010 23:05 Peter Jeremy said the following: >> On 2010-Aug-24 17:00:36 +0200, Ollivier Robert <roberto@keltia.freenix.f= r> wrote: >>> According to Peter Jeremy: >>>> I suspect Artem is referring to his patch at http://pastebin.com/ZCkzk= Wcs >>>> which I have tweaked somewhat (see the last patch in >>>> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=3D146410 ). >>> >>> Thanks, cou you please send it in a non-QP-encoded form please? >> >> See attached. >>>> Whilst these patches _are_ hacks, they seem to do a good job of >>>> making ZFS and UFS play together. >>> >>> Is the patch only useful in these mixed situations or could it be also = interestng for those of use running full-zfs (cf. http://www.keltia.net/how= tos/zfsboot)? >> >> I think it will be useful. =A0As well as the trivial fix to count >> "cache" as "free" space (which is now in -stable), the intent of the >> patch is to improve the ability of ZFS to apply pressure to the VM >> subsystem. =A0In theory, this should improve overall system performance >> even in a ZFS-only environment where there is memory pressure due to >> large, long-running processes > > Peter, Ollivier, > > would it be possible for you to test patch informally specified in the fo= llowing > post? > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.os.freebsd.devel.hackers/40788 > > -- > Andriy Gapon > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-fs@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTikDngjwH08b4QVCgZfZ_kWmZox=FtWEHZ2-Bd%2B4>