From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 22 09:10:00 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A145E16A469; Tue, 22 May 2007 09:10:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pjd@garage.freebsd.pl) Received: from mail.garage.freebsd.pl (arm132.internetdsl.tpnet.pl [83.17.198.132]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8CAB13C448; Tue, 22 May 2007 09:09:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pjd@garage.freebsd.pl) Received: by mail.garage.freebsd.pl (Postfix, from userid 65534) id 958A448801; Tue, 22 May 2007 11:09:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (154.81.datacomsa.pl [195.34.81.154]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.garage.freebsd.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14DA7487F0; Tue, 22 May 2007 11:09:54 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 11:09:47 +0200 From: Pawel Jakub Dawidek To: Vince Message-ID: <20070522090947.GA3005@garage.freebsd.pl> References: <20070407191517.GN63916@garage.freebsd.pl> <20070407212413.GK8831@cicely12.cicely.de> <20070410003505.GA8189@nowhere> <20070410003837.GB8189@nowhere> <20070410011125.GB38535@xor.obsecurity.org> <20070410013034.GC8189@nowhere> <20070410014233.GD8189@nowhere> <4651BD6F.5050301@unsane.co.uk> <20070522083112.GA5136@hub.freebsd.org> <4652B15D.5060505@unsane.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="BXVAT5kNtrzKuDFl" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4652B15D.5060505@unsane.co.uk> X-PGP-Key-URL: http://people.freebsd.org/~pjd/pjd.asc X-OS: FreeBSD 7.0-CURRENT i386 User-Agent: mutt-ng/devel-r804 (FreeBSD) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) on mail.garage.freebsd.pl X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.0.4 Cc: Darren Reed , freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, Kris Kennaway , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Craig Boston Subject: Re: ZFS committed to the FreeBSD base. X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 09:10:00 -0000 --BXVAT5kNtrzKuDFl Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 10:01:17AM +0100, Vince wrote: > Darren Reed wrote: > > On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 04:40:31PM +0100, Vince wrote: > > ... > >> I dont suppose that there are any other tunables people could suggest?= I > >> got a shiny new(well old but new to me) dual opteron board and dual 250 > >> sata drives and though i'd try putting it in as my home server with > >> everything but / on zfs since i've had my /usr/ports on my laptop as > >> compressed zfs since very shortly after it was commited. > >> After a few kmem_map: too small" panics I re-read this thread and put > >> vm.kmem_size_max and vm.kmem_size up to 512M and vfs.zfs.arc_min > >> vfs.zfs.arc_max down to 65 megs. This did get me past "portsnap extrac= t" > >> but a make buildworld still got me the same panic. vmstat -z showed a > >> steady growth. This is with a generic -CURRENT from friday. I'm happy = to > >> provide any useful information once I get home and reboot it. > >=20 > > Are you running the opterons with a 32 or 64 bit kernel? > >=20 > > I set vfs.zfs.arc_max to somewhere between 75% and 80% of vm.kmem_size_= max. > >=20 > I'm running i386 more because I had a i386 CD lying around to install > from and wont be using more than 3Gigs of RAM, than through informed > choice. It looks like setting kern.maxvnodes=3D50000 has solved it for = now. >=20 > (after almost a day of uptime including building world and adding the > 2nd disk to the zfs mirror) > [root@crab ~]# vmstat -m | grep sol > solaris 188066 139903K - 164899933 > 16,32,64,128,256,512,1024,2048,4096 >=20 > I may reinstall at a later date as this is still very much a box to play > with, but I gather there is no great gain from going 64 bit other than > not having to play with PAE if you've got lots or RAM. I expect there is a huge difference in performance between i386 and amd64. I'm currently setting up environment to compare ZFS on FreeBSD/i386, FreeBSD/amd64 and Solaris. --=20 Pawel Jakub Dawidek http://www.wheel.pl pjd@FreeBSD.org http://www.FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer Am I Evil? Yes, I Am! --BXVAT5kNtrzKuDFl Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFGUrNbForvXbEpPzQRAjubAKCbBilKQ/6Q//R9DNeB0I8G4oe6uwCg8Pq4 eJKqrg+/FVDZxNjAtg5KqDk= =/RNi -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --BXVAT5kNtrzKuDFl--