Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 16:44:16 +0100 From: Tom Evans <tevans.uk@googlemail.com> To: Ollivier Robert <roberto@keltia.freenix.fr> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kmem_map too small: 3832475648 total allocated Message-ID: <n2m2e027be01004290844k51dd6060q77375e894ff4efc4@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20100429145334.GB62822@roberto-al.eurocontrol.fr> References: <4BD8F7FA.2080103@jrv.org> <20100429145334.GB62822@roberto-al.eurocontrol.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 3:53 PM, Ollivier Robert <roberto@keltia.freenix.fr> wrote: > According to James R. Van Artsdalen: >> system is a Core i7 975 (3.33 GHz x 4 cores 3x threads per core) with 12 >> GB of RAM, a 2x2TB ZFS boot pool and a second (idle) pool of 16x2TB. > >> panic: kmem_malloc(131072): kmem_map too small: 3832475648 total allocated > > Apart from the fact that you must at least set vm.kmem_size to something like 2x your RAM, one rule of thumb I've seen discussed for ZFS is that you will need approximatively 1 GB of RAM per TB of data so you may be a bit short here to get optimal perfs. > Citation needed? I have a file server running amd64 8-STABLE with 4GB of RAM, 6 x 1.5 TB drives in raidz, and have never had any problems with memory usage. Are you saying that after my next update, adding another 6 x 1.5 TB drives, it will start being flaky and/or panicing with kmem_map too small errors? Cheers Tom
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?n2m2e027be01004290844k51dd6060q77375e894ff4efc4>