Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 00:50:27 +0300 From: Artem Kuchin <artem@artem.ru> To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Little research how rm -rf and tar kill server Message-ID: <5519C523.7090009@artem.ru> In-Reply-To: <1427731061.306961.247099633.0A421E90@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <55170D9C.1070107@artem.ru> <1427727936.293597.247070269.5CE0D411@webmail.messagingengine.com> <55196FC7.8090107@artem.ru> <1427730597.303984.247097389.165D5AAB@webmail.messagingengine.com> <5519716F.6060007@artem.ru> <1427731061.306961.247099633.0A421E90@webmail.messagingengine.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
30.03.2015 18:57, Mark Felder пишет: > > On Mon, Mar 30, 2015, at 10:53, Artem Kuchin wrote: >> This is normal state, not under rm -rf >> Do you need it during rm -rf ? >> > No, but I wonder if changing the timer from LAPIC to HPET or possibly > one of the other timers makes the system more responsive under that > load. Would you mind testing that? > > You can switch the timer like this: > > sysctl kern.eventtimer.timer=HPET > > And then run some of your I/O tests > > The full list of available timers is under sysctl kern.eventtimer.choice > -- you could try any of them, but the higher the number next to the name > is the higher perceived "quality" of the timer by the system. > > Tried them all with rm -rf did not notice any difference at all problems start pretty much after the amount of time and severity is the same ssh terminal is very responsive using all of them until i do something which need to access hdd Artem
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5519C523.7090009>