From owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Fri Jul 24 06:59:11 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFBDF9A7003 for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 06:59:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from holm@freibergnet.de) Received: from bmail.freibergnet.de (bmail.freibergnet.de [46.4.195.14]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 917161EA7; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 06:59:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from holm@freibergnet.de) Received: from bmail.freibergnet.de (bmail.freibergnet.de [46.4.195.14]) by bmail.freibergnet.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C856929A514; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 08:58:16 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at freibergnet.de Received: from bmail.freibergnet.de ([46.4.195.14]) by bmail.freibergnet.de (bmail.freibergnet.de [46.4.195.14]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 1L35-BkrEV0F; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 08:58:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from beast.freibergnet.de (bmail.freibergnet.de [46.4.195.14]) by bmail.freibergnet.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98A6D929A4FA; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 08:58:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: by beast.freibergnet.de (Postfix, from userid 201) id 128074B783C; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 08:58:14 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 08:58:14 +0200 From: Holm Tiffe To: Glen Barber Cc: freebsd-stable Subject: Re: 10.2-Beta i386..what's wrong..? Message-ID: <20150724065814.GB11640@beast.freibergnet.de> Mail-Followup-To: Holm Tiffe , Glen Barber , freebsd-stable References: <55B17B7A.4080402@gmail.com> <20150723234805.GK84931@FreeBSD.org> <55B18488.9060602@sorbs.net> <20150724004026.GA1370@lonesome.com> <20150724004343.GM84931@FreeBSD.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20150724004343.GM84931@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 06:59:12 -0000 Glen Barber wrote: > On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 08:42:44PM -0400, Brandon Allbery wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 8:40 PM, Mark Linimon wrote: > > > > > zfs is a resource hog. i386 is not able to handle the demand as well > > > as amd64. > > > > > > > Even amd64 is no guarantee. I installed one of the Illumos spinoffs on a > > 2GB amd64 netbook (they mostly force zfs). I think it lasted 2 days before > > the kernel panics started. > > > > Even on amd64, you need to tune the system with less than 4GB RAM. > > Glen > ..interrestingly people here seem to focus my problem to ZFS.. but my problem was to build an raid over 4 disks on my old i386 machine and that failed with 2 different approaches. I'm accepting that ZFS is a too big thing for the i386 architecture and I possibly should leave it alone on that machine. But my 2nd try with gvinum failed also ...why? In the meantime I've set up the first two disks to a geom_mirror and installed 2x swap and a 66G ufs on the mirror, successfully installed 10.2-Beta, pulled the sources with svn and rebuild the entire world and a kernel yesterday. That worked flawlessly. So the hardware is out of the question here. It seems that geom_vinum is broken and it is broken on 9.3 10.1 and 10.2-Beta. There isn't an other possibility anymore. Can someone please confirm this with a similar machine? Proably I could atach an IDE disk and move the new build system to it to give ZFS a 2nd try on the 4 SCSI Disks to prove if something changed n the meantime or if a kernel with KSTACK_PAGES=4 would fix the ZFS problem. I had running gvinum and gmirror on that machine in the past up to 8.4-stable. It seems that we've lost this possibility now.. Regards, Holm -- Technik Service u. Handel Tiffe, www.tsht.de, Holm Tiffe, Freiberger Straße 42, 09600 Oberschöna, USt-Id: DE253710583 www.tsht.de, info@tsht.de, Fax +49 3731 74200, Mobil: 0172 8790 741