From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 8 16:25:26 2009 Return-Path: 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 A832110656F0; Wed, 8 Apr 2009 16:25:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mad@madpilot.net) Received: from megatron.madpilot.net (megatron.madpilot.net [88.149.173.206]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54E708FC26; Wed, 8 Apr 2009 16:25:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mad@madpilot.net) Received: by megatron.madpilot.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id CEBF5130C3A; Wed, 8 Apr 2009 18:07:41 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2009 18:07:41 +0200 From: Guido Falsi To: Ivan Voras Message-ID: <20090408160741.GC26242@megatron.madpilot.net> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 7.1-STABLE User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFSKnownProblems - needs revision? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2009 16:25:27 -0000 On Wed, Apr 08, 2009 at 02:50:33PM +0200, Ivan Voras wrote: > Ivan Voras wrote: > > > * Are the issues on the list still there? > > * Are there any new issues? > > * Is somebody running ZFS in production (non-trivial loads) with > > success? What architecture / RAM / load / applications used? > > * How is your memory load? (does it leave enough memory for other services) > > also: what configuration (RAIDZ, mirror, etc.?) I've been playing with 8.0 zfs on low end machines(laptops with 768MB-1GB RAM and just one disk device). I have successfully made them boot off of ZFS using gpt, this is not mentioned in ZFSOnRoot. I used the guide found here: http://blogs.freebsdish.org/lulf/category/freebsd/ Also still requires manually recompiling loader with ZFS support. Shouldn't this made trhe default in 8.0? I had a panic while doing a make clean in the openoffice port after compilation due to kmem exhaustion using the tuning suggested in the Tuning Guide; solved by using these: vm.kmem_size="384M" vm.kmem_size_max="384M" vfs.zfs.arc_max="40M" vfs.zfs.vdev.cache.size="5M" this is on an i386 laptop with 768 MB RAM, I should experiment a little with cache.size and arc_max too... On a 1GB RAM laptop(it's an EeePC labelled 904HA, has a 160GB disc) I'm using slughtly higher values with success for now, but I've installed this just a few days ago and have not made any tests. The last thing I noticed is the knownproblems wiki reports swapping on zfs' zvols is not working. I have not stress tested this to the limit, but my systems are successfully working with zvols as the only swapping device and actively swaping to it. What could be a good way to stress test his to the limit? hope these information helps someway. I'd like to test ZFS on some serious hardware with serious load, but I haven't had the chance at work for the time being. -- Guido Falsi