Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 02:20:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Simun Mikecin <numisemis@yahoo.com> To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Areca vs. ZFS performance testing. Message-ID: <880498.17704.qm@web36603.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> The tuning variables I advocate for a system with 2GB of RAM or more,
> on RELENG_7, are:
> vm.kmem_size="1536M"
> vm.kmem_size_max="1536M"
There is no point in setting vm.kmem_size_max. Setting
vm.kmem_size is enough. vm.kmem_size_max is used for
auto-tuning of kmem size which is in this case actually
overriden by manually setting vm.kmem_size.
> vfs.zfs.arc_min="16M"
> vfs.zfs.arc_max="64M"
> vfs.zfs.prefetch_disable="1"
> You can gradually increase arc_min and arc_max by
> ~16MB increments as
> you see fit; you should see general performance
> improvements as they
> get larger (more data being kept in the ARC), but
> don't get too crazy.
> I've tuned arc_max up to 128MB before with
> success, but I don't want
> to try anything larger without decreasing kmem_size_*.
Can you explain why would you have to decrease kmem_size to
use larger ARC?
AFAIK it should be contrary to what you are saying: when
you use larger kmem_size you can also use larger arc_max.
My suggestion if you are using kmem_size of 1536M would be
to not tune arc_min and arc_max if your system isn't
panicing. If it does you should try decreasing arc_max (from
it's default value) until it doesn't.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?880498.17704.qm>