From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jun 5 14:00:23 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2661106566C for ; Thu, 5 Jun 2008 14:00:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-hackers@m.gmane.org) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2947D8FC18 for ; Thu, 5 Jun 2008 14:00:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-hackers@m.gmane.org) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1K4G0r-0003sv-3p for freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org; Thu, 05 Jun 2008 14:00:21 +0000 Received: from lara.cc.fer.hr ([161.53.72.113]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 05 Jun 2008 14:00:21 +0000 Received: from ivoras by lara.cc.fer.hr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 05 Jun 2008 14:00:21 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org From: Ivan Voras Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 16:00:13 +0200 Lines: 60 Message-ID: References: <6a7033710805302252v43a7b240x66ca3f5e3dd5fda4@mail.gmail.com> <20080603135308.GC3434@garage.freebsd.pl> <6a7033710806032317g4dbe8845h26a1196016b9c440@mail.gmail.com> <86zlq140x0.fsf@ds4.des.no> <6a7033710806041053g4a5c2fdftd7202b708bff363c@mail.gmail.com> <20080605062728.GA4278@garage.freebsd.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigD68D107016C060E9C72D20D4" X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: lara.cc.fer.hr User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080505) In-Reply-To: <20080605062728.GA4278@garage.freebsd.pl> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.0 Sender: news Subject: Re: Is there any way to increase the KVM? X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 14:00:23 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigD68D107016C060E9C72D20D4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: > If we're comparing who has bigger... :) >=20 > beast:root:~# zpool list > NAME SIZE USED AVAIL CAP HEALTH ALTROOT= > tank 732G 604G 128G 82% ONLINE - >=20 > but: >=20 > beast:root:~# zfs list | wc -l > 1932 >=20 > No panics. >=20 > PS. I'm quite sure the ZFS version I've in perforce will fix most if no= t > all 'kmem_map too small' panics. It's not yet committed, but I do want > to MFC it into RELENG_7. At the risk of sounding repetitive, can you try a simple test on your ZFS pools, to see if you can panic the kernel? Do this: * install blogbench and bonnie++ from ports/benchmarks * run: blogbench -c 100 -d . -i 30 -r 50 -W 10 -w 10 bonnie++ -d . -s 16G -n 80 in parallel, until completion or crash. It shouldn't take too long to complete the above benchmarks, so you probably won't invest too much time in it even if it doesn't crash. (note: in the above command lines, "." is the current working directory, which is on ZFS, and "16G" is "2*RAM size". Keep the "-s" argument high even if you don't have lots of RAM.) This assumes you have a multi-core machine on which ZFS is running. 4 would be nice, 2 is probably ok. --------------enigD68D107016C060E9C72D20D4 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFIR/FtldnAQVacBcgRAimIAKDGj6oI2veyw/rznL+1lM3uY+d/tACfcSli FP09jC4k0ttb/r38OuAakLg= =RMij -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigD68D107016C060E9C72D20D4--