Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2010 22:20:47 +0300 From: Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> To: Steven Hartland <killing@multiplay.co.uk> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: zfs very poor performance compared to ufs due to lack of cache? Message-ID: <4C8D280F.3040803@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <03537796FAB54E02959E2D64FC83004F@multiplay.co.uk> References: <5DB6E7C798E44D33A05673F4B773405E@multiplay.co.uk><AANLkTikNhsj5myhQCoPaNytUbpHtox1vg9AZm1N-OcMO@mail.gmail.com><4C85E91E.1010602@icyb.net.ua> <4C873914.40404@freebsd.org><20100908084855.GF2465@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <4C874F00.3050605@freebsd.org> <A6D7E134B24F42E395C30A375A6B50AF@multiplay.co.uk> <4C8D087B.5040404@freebsd.org> <03537796FAB54E02959E2D64FC83004F@multiplay.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 12/09/2010 20:29 Steven Hartland said the following: > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andriy Gapon" <avg@freebsd.org> >> >> Well, I do not see enough technical details in this report to see what's going >> on. As we know, there is also another issue (not sendfile specific) leading to >> ARC shrinking. > > What details would you like? > All :-) Revision of your code, all the extra patches, workload, graphs of ARC and memory dynamics and that's just for the start. Then, analysis similar to that of Wiktor. E.g. trying to test with a single file and then removing it, or better yet, examining with DTrace actual code paths taken from sendfile(2). -- Andriy Gapon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4C8D280F.3040803>