Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:47:35 +0100 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org> To: Zaphod Beeblebrox <zbeeble@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org, Thomas Vogt <freebsdlists@bsdunix.ch> Subject: Re: vm_thread_new: kstack allocation failed with many ZFS FS and NFSD Message-ID: <47D63917.9080800@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <5f67a8c40803101813k3a2b790dk57b67bc2d6f85d17@mail.gmail.com> References: <47D544B1.6070806@bsdunix.ch> <47D5D2B2.90202@FreeBSD.org> <5f67a8c40803101813k3a2b790dk57b67bc2d6f85d17@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 8:30 PM, Kris Kennaway <kris@freebsd.org > <mailto:kris@freebsd.org>> wrote: > > > Your kernel has run out of memory. If you cannot tune kmem_size further > then it cannot handle this many ZFS filesystems. > > > Roughly how much kernel memory does a filesystem use (even if inactive) > --- or did you really mean something like too many pools? > > The ZFS documentation encourages creating filesystems for everything. I > think my (rather beafy) laptop has 20 filesystems now for various tasks > --- but I didn't realize there was a non-trivial cost (that is: a cost > beyond the mount structure, root vnodes and whatnot)... > > Well everything has a memory requirement when you add additional instances of it :) I don't know what the breakdown is for ZFS. Kris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?47D63917.9080800>