From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 1 18:52:57 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A9097137 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 18:52:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailuogwdur.emc.com (mailuogwdur.emc.com [128.221.224.79]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mailuogwprd51.lss.emc.com", Issuer "RSA Corporate Server CA v2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54E739B9 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 18:52:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from maildlpprd56.lss.emc.com (maildlpprd56.lss.emc.com [10.106.48.160]) by mailuogwprd52.lss.emc.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.0) with ESMTP id t31Iqov2030318 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 1 Apr 2015 14:52:54 -0400 X-DKIM: OpenDKIM Filter v2.4.3 mailuogwprd52.lss.emc.com t31Iqov2030318 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=isilon.com; s=jan2013; t=1427914375; bh=PV7giu9X0lGsgdvwaubtW0x5mZk=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:Message-ID:References:In-Reply-To: Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; b=n/cIdKL4C1R3ItaMcWjC4XNGMmRbbsD54Vm4PX5j9ytVHssUkmRjtWxp25OZ5/jJJ 2etsDc0Lp41R3IU9Ymz1+Nehp4LjeQjZkIRRenYLxMwnB1mMkYchUfaAtPFXwDoRiA TSyJsrF/NSBSCwHwlFpdlaT0KeiwCAQXzWwk9wJA= X-DKIM: OpenDKIM Filter v2.4.3 mailuogwprd52.lss.emc.com t31Iqov2030318 Received: from mailusrhubprd02.lss.emc.com (mailusrhubprd02.lss.emc.com [10.253.24.20]) by maildlpprd56.lss.emc.com (RSA Interceptor); Wed, 1 Apr 2015 14:52:12 -0400 Received: from mxhub27.corp.emc.com (mxhub27.corp.emc.com [10.254.110.183]) by mailusrhubprd02.lss.emc.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.0) with ESMTP id t31IqXnn030872 (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Wed, 1 Apr 2015 14:52:34 -0400 Received: from MXHUB103.corp.emc.com (10.253.50.16) by mxhub27.corp.emc.com (10.254.110.183) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.327.1; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 14:52:33 -0400 Received: from MX103CL02.corp.emc.com ([169.254.6.202]) by MXHUB103.corp.emc.com ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0224.002; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 14:52:33 -0400 From: "Meyer, Conrad" To: "Gumpula, Suresh" Subject: RE: BSD 8.1 and 9.1 memory increase Thread-Topic: BSD 8.1 and 9.1 memory increase Thread-Index: AQHQYN1kO9bXTk+QcE+8E2hd8pdV+Z0hK5sAgBZxt4CAADccAIAAWDtEgAB/noCAACxHgP//vyvE Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2015 18:52:32 +0000 Message-ID: References: , In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.13.36.127] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Sentrion-Hostname: mailusrhubprd02.lss.emc.com X-RSA-Classifications: public Cc: "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2015 18:52:57 -0000 From: Gumpula, Suresh [Suresh.Gumpula@netapp.com]=0A= Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2015 11:42 AM=0A= To: Gumpula, Suresh; Meyer, Conrad; Garrett Cooper=0A= Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org; alc@freebsd.org=0A= Subject: Re: BSD 8.1 and 9.1 memory increase=0A= =0A= I just tried the change you mentioned on unmapping unused entries , and=0A= appears this saves good amount of real memory. On my idle machine it=0A= shows ~20M + real memory savings. Specifically the inactive/wired pages=0A= dropped down.=0A= https://reviews.freebsd.org/D1263=0A= =0A= And also drastic VSS size down for most of the processes. Is this=0A= incomplete or Can I take this change ?=0A= =0A= Thanks=0A= Suresh=0A= =0A= ________________________________________=0A= =0A= Hi,=0A= =0A= The criticisms in the comments on that review are still perfectly valid. I = would not use the patch as-is.=0A= =0A= It is surprising that you see rsz reductions with it. I think it's probably= an apples-to-oranges comparison and the application(s) have not been warme= d up yet.=0A= =0A= Best,=0A= Conrad=