Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2024 17:29:36 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: fs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 275594] High CPU usage by arc_prune; analysis and fix Message-ID: <bug-275594-3630-9i8QLbMMrq@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-275594-3630@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-275594-3630@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D275594 --- Comment #23 from Seigo Tanimura <seigo.tanimura@gmail.com> --- (In reply to Mark Johnston from comment #1) > > - vfs.vnode.vnlru.max_free_per_call=3D100000 > This value is 10 times larger than the default. Why did you change this = parameter? What happens if you leave it at the default value? Out of the tests so far, I now believe that the default value of vfs.vnode.vnlru.max_free_per_call (10K) was chosen in order to polish the l= oad under the uncontrollable and unreasonable ARC pruning requests. Now that the ARC pruning is precisely throttled for the efficient execution= , it should be all right to increase vfs.vnode.vnlru.max_free_per_call up to vfs.vnode.param.limit and let ZFS determine the actual work load.=20 vnode_list_mtx is an expensive lock, so once we acquire it, we should prune= as many vnodes as we can. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-275594-3630-9i8QLbMMrq>