Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 00:05:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Simun Mikecin <numisemis@yahoo.com> To: Dan Naumov <dan.naumov@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS performance on 7.2-release/amd64 low compared to UFS2 + SoftUpdates Message-ID: <270394.95537.qm@web37305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <cf9b1ee00906171707r885b33csd4ec9026202bc63@mail.gmail.com> References: <cf9b1ee00906170034q1cee4581hb518f53e9f368368@mail.gmail.com> <op.uvo0joki8527sy@82-170-177-25.ip.telfort.nl> <cf9b1ee00906171707r885b33csd4ec9026202bc63@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dan Naumov wrote:
> All the ZFS tuning guides for FreeBSD (including one on the FreeBSD
> ZFS wiki) have recommended values between 64M and 128M to improve
> stability, so that what I went with. How much of my max kmem is it
> safe to give to ZFS?
On amd64 since 7.2-RELEASE manually adjusting kmem map or arc size is not necessary any more (see /usr/src/UPDATING) for stability. But if you like you can still do it.
If you want to use ZFS allot I suggest to use latest 7-STABLE (which has ZFS v13, more stable, more bugs resolved). amd64 of course. For i386 it would be better to use UFS+SU (for SCSI) or UFS+gjournal (for ATA).
btw. turning on compression on ZFS filesystems might actually increase it's performance that is seen by benchmark programs.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?270394.95537.qm>