From owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Tue Aug 11 15:38:46 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3085299F51A for ; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 15:38:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from csforgeron@gmail.com) Received: from mail-io0-x22a.google.com (mail-io0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EC441E6 for ; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 15:38:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from csforgeron@gmail.com) Received: by ioeg141 with SMTP id g141so205996624ioe.3 for ; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 08:38:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=zCmEPHDmpLhHxZio7D0+7ivdbFdj2GoQhRBVI8iS0og=; b=ag4p5/SnBHedYEu5VLouWl1cmLJpp7JnpiUZxPncJS1rTomVBYcNqFhC4/TDkTq11Q TmlgvTuRz0BUPy/065dixSTMUcGoF5viyGVeviB/EW2vubaN8G8E9XZykiR8YjuE6ZzI VZQcWgEtTIV6p7x9kXiCvAAPg5/mL97DtegCVF10kxCC2ZWPUVygHXy13ZhybdM4yKXL DT2WYHOczTHMlHZEx7wyEBF4VU28yKRk6RlxL03oCz7dle4F4/g/P3FkqKY5McDh8qcf YQL8q6NmHRuwS3+kBqG9EbgrS+eHzGXZzUphAXUvWxXH+BC672ffWI8N9VlpAnFe4K91 6k9g== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.107.131.168 with SMTP id n40mr31182572ioi.47.1439307525223; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 08:38:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.36.34.77 with HTTP; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 08:38:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <55A6C4BD.5090500@denninger.net> References: <55A3A800.5060904@denninger.net> <55A4D5B7.2030603@freebsd.org> <55A4E5AB.8060909@netlabs.org> <1436989410.1427298.324703241.421E814B@webmail.messagingengine.com> <55A6C0A4.1030300@digiware.nl> <55A6C4BD.5090500@denninger.net> Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 12:38:45 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: FreeBSD 10.1 Memory Exhaustion From: Christopher Forgeron To: Karl Denninger Cc: FreeBSD Filesystems Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.20 X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 15:38:46 -0000 Hello All, Any reports on success / issues with the patch? I'm reporting a good increase in uptime and stability. I have two production machines with heavy load running, and I've made it almost a month without a crash on one machine. The other had a swap-related crash that wasn't really a fault/issue of the patch, but even with that one crash, it's been more stable than a non-patched system. I'm curious to everyone else's findings. On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 5:38 PM, Karl Denninger wrote: > > On 7/15/2015 15:20, Willem Jan Withagen wrote: > > On 15/07/2015 21:43, Mark Felder wrote: > >> > >> On Tue, Jul 14, 2015, at 10:10, Sean Chittenden wrote: > >>> I think the reason this is not seen more often is because people > >>> frequently > >>> throw limits on the arc in /boot/loader.conf: > >>> > >>> vfs.zfs.arc_min="18G" > >>> vfs.zfs.arc_max="149G" > >>> > >>> ZFS ARC *should* not require those settings, but does currently for > mixed > >>> workloads (i.e. databases) in order to be "stable". By setting fixed > >>> sizes > >>> on the ARC, UMA and ARC are much more cooperative in that they have > their > >>> own memory regions to manage so this behavior is not seen as often. > >>> > >>> To be clear, however, it should not be necessary to set parameters like > >>> these in /boot/loader.conf in order to obtain consistent operational > >>> behavior. I'd be curious to know if someone running 10.2 BETA without > >>> patches is able to trigger this behavior or not. There was work done > >>> that > >>> reported helped with this between 10.1 and now. To what extent it > >>> helped, > >>> however, I don't have any advice yet. > >>> > >> I was about to email "I have 12TB at home and 4GB of RAM with a very > >> erratic workload and never run into any issues" and then I looked at > >> /boot/loader.conf and saw vfs.zfs.arc_max="2G" > >> > >> Now I'm too scared to turn it off... :-) > > Same here. > > Just a leftover of all the advise to limit arc in the past. > > Just bit the bullit: installed BETA1, killed the settings and rebooted. > > We'll see what comes of it. > > > > --WjW > If you get bit I have refactored the patch for 10.2-BETA1 to get rid of > the fudges and i386 linker problem and uploaded it, so if you run into > trouble try applying that and see if that fixes it. > > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187594 > > -- > Karl Denninger > karl@denninger.net > /The Market Ticker/ > /[S/MIME encrypted email preferred]/ >