From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 5 04:11:19 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A2065DB for ; Tue, 5 Mar 2013 04:11:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from karl@denninger.net) Received: from fs.denninger.net (wsip-70-169-168-7.pn.at.cox.net [70.169.168.7]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ECDADF5 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 2013 04:11:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fs.denninger.net (8.14.6/8.13.1) with ESMTP id r254BGTe042625 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 2013 22:11:17 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from karl@denninger.net) Received: from [127.0.0.1] [192.168.1.40] by Spamblock-sys (LOCAL); Mon Mar 4 22:11:17 2013 Message-ID: <5135705F.6090406@denninger.net> Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2013 22:11:11 -0600 From: Karl Denninger User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130215 Thunderbird/17.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS "stalls" -- and maybe we should be talking about defaults? References: <513524B2.6020600@denninger.net> <1362449266.92708.8.camel@btw.pki2.com> <51355F64.4040409@denninger.net> <8C68812328E3483BA9786EF15591124D@multiplay.co.uk> <513568EE.80006@denninger.net> <19488839B29A476C8F731EB8F419AF94@multiplay.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <19488839B29A476C8F731EB8F419AF94@multiplay.co.uk> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5 X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 130304-2, 03/04/2013), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.14 X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2013 04:11:19 -0000 On 3/4/2013 10:01 PM, Steven Hartland wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Karl Denninger" >>> Then it happened I thought the machine had wedged, but minutes (not >>> seconds) later, everything sprung into action again. >> >> That's exactly what I can reproduce here; the stalls are anywhere from a >> few seconds to well north of a half-minute. It looks like the machine >> is hung -- but it is not. > > Out of interest when this happens for you is syncer using lots of CPU? > > If its anything like my stalls you'll need top loaded prior to the fact. > > Regards > Steve Don't know. But the CPU is getting hammered when it happens because I am geli-encrypting all my drives and as a consequence it is not at all uncommon for the load average to be north of 10 when the system is under heavy I/O load. System response is fine right up until it stalls. I'm going to put some effort into trying to isolate exactly what is going on here in the coming days since I happen to have a spare box in an identical configuration that I can afford to lock up without impacting anyone doing real work :-) -- -- Karl Denninger /The Market Ticker ®/ Cuda Systems LLC