Date: Tue, 3 May 2011 14:30:15 +0200 From: Olaf Seibert <O.Seibert@cs.ru.nl> To: Jeremy Chadwick <freebsd@jdc.parodius.com> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Olaf Seibert <O.Seibert@cs.ru.nl> Subject: Re: Automatic reboot doesn't reboot Message-ID: <20110503123015.GZ6733@twoquid.cs.ru.nl> In-Reply-To: <20110503122052.GA13811@icarus.home.lan> References: <20110502143230.GW6733@twoquid.cs.ru.nl> <20110503092113.GA39704@icarus.home.lan> <20110503100854.GY6733@twoquid.cs.ru.nl> <20110503122052.GA13811@icarus.home.lan>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue 03 May 2011 at 05:20:52 -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > To be on the safe side, pick something that's small at first, then work > your way up. You'll need probably 1+ weeks of heavy ZFS I/O between > tests (e.g. don't change the tunable, reboot, then 4 hours later declare > the new (larger) value as stable). Ah, that's important: so far it seemed to me that a *too small* value (for all various tunables) would cause problems, but now you're saying that *too large* is the problem (at least for vfs.zfs.arc_max)! This machine has mixed loads; from time to time somebody starts a big job with lots of I/O, and in between it is much more modestly loaded. > So for example on an 8GB RAM machine, I might recommend starting with > vfs.zfs.arc_max="4096M" and let that run for a while. If you find your > "Wired" value in top(1) remains fairly constant after a week or so of > heavy I/O, consider bumping up the value a bit more (say 4608M). I'll do just that. > Sorry to make this long-winded; bad habit of mine that I've never > managed to break. Oh no problem, it turns out to be eye-opening! > | Jeremy Chadwick jdc@parodius.com | -Olaf. -- Pipe rene = new PipePicture(); assert(Not rene.GetType().Equals(Pipe));
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110503123015.GZ6733>