Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 05:25:29 +0200 From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: Artem Belevich <fbsdlist@src.cx> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Martin Matuska <mm@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [CFT] Improved ZFS metaslab code (faster write speed) Message-ID: <20100830052529.00002808@unknown> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=LQOQvs4RXih3UdOvPRFt4mzr862nc2ZY6mXdH@mail.gmail.com> References: <4C713EF5.8080402@FreeBSD.org> <AANLkTi=8x1EenWyqGz6AQWKDUq5JiMJbX_jbVbX43DKx@mail.gmail.com> <4C714FC0.90005@FreeBSD.org> <AANLkTim_BH4WrQUY-X491c%2BfLaP2FKMcS1k-DN5tLG-9@mail.gmail.com> <20100828081917.ee931f7f.nork@FreeBSD.org> <AANLkTi=hbL3wfTvmfBhPkpJ7orh_WuhagGPoXaS_hcTW@mail.gmail.com> <4C78655C.3010200@DataIX.net> <AANLkTi=LQOQvs4RXih3UdOvPRFt4mzr862nc2ZY6mXdH@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 27 Aug 2010 20:34:18 -0700 Artem Belevich <fbsdlist@src.cx> wrote: > Perhaps reduced UMA fragmentation helps those subsystem that do use > UMA (including ZFS which always uses uma for various housekeeping > data). PJD told me once that ZFS is always using UMA, it is just not using it for everything (except when the sysctl is switched to use it for everything). FYI: I have a 9-current system which panics (without a backtrace/dump) after 1-2 days of uptime when the zfs-uma-sysctl is activated. When it is not activated it survives several weeks (let's say about a month). So any work on the UMA fragmentation issue is well spend time. No, I haven't tested any of the patches on this machine. Bye, Alexander.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100830052529.00002808>