From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 15 15:06:53 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2F661065678 for ; Wed, 15 Feb 2012 15:06:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from devgs@ukr.net) Received: from ffe16.ukr.net (ffe16.ukr.net [195.214.192.51]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E1078FC08 for ; Wed, 15 Feb 2012 15:06:53 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ukr.net; s=ffe; h=Date:Message-Id:From:To:Subject:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; bh=0Wi659HSVc0fvBPnwI90Y/FOzNyW6RJoY4mR7e1H9fc=; b=JsdkU0gOYLK5HZrVHS49PaS14ml4FGz6HNycPnU1PnhS2VmfaqxcVv/dy8LjJsX6m6vptShzwmKM+z2L4Lgkh1fQNimKd+LfFGIuKVeeSrGeIuqA/CsxvihCdgYpD0SJ1nY7bbJNoSuuOH1zamW+bFbQ/Kc9DpEbDH15eaRTWno=; Received: from mail by ffe16.ukr.net with local ID 1RxgRY-000Igh-50 for freebsd-fs@freebsd.org; Wed, 15 Feb 2012 17:06:52 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org From: "Pavlo" X-Mailer: freemail.ukr.net 4.0 X-Originating-Ip: [212.42.94.154] Message-Id: <70229.1329318412.9319724204137054208@ffe16.ukr.net> X-Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux i686; rv:10.0.1) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/10.0.1 Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 17:06:52 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1251" Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary Content-Disposition: inline X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Subject: ZFS and mem management X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 15:06:54 -0000 >On 15/02/2012 13:39, Pavlo wrote: >> >> >> >> Unfortunately we can't afford disabling prefetch. It is too much of an>> overhead.>> >> Also I made some tests. I have process that maps file using mmap() and>> writes or reads first byte of each page of mapped file with some data.> >Note that ZFS is designed so that it interacts somewhat badly with >mmap() and other kernel services which rely on coherency between VM and >IO such as sendfile(). At the very best, you will have two in-kernel >copies of all data buffers used with such interfaces, but there have >been sporadic reports that there are other bugs with it. > >If you have a test server, I'd recommend you do the same test on UFS for >comparison. Was going to try this... Thanks for reply.