Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2007 15:53:24 +0100 From: Michael Rebele <m.rebele@web.de> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 7.0-Beta 3: zfs makes system reboot Message-ID: <47541864.8050306@web.de> In-Reply-To: <8e10486b0711300910n208e6729kf108e7a79c8e326e@mail.gmail.com> References: <475039D5.4020204@web.de> <8e10486b0711300910n208e6729kf108e7a79c8e326e@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Alexandre Biancalana wrote: > On Nov 30, 2007 2:27 PM, Michael Rebele <m.rebele@web.de> wrote: >> 4. The applied kernel settings >> kern.maxvnodes="400000" >> vm.kmem_size_max="512M" >> vm.kmem_size="512M" >> >> 5. Output from zpool >> [root@zfs /root]# zpool status >> pool: tank >> state: ONLINE >> scrub: none requested >> config: >> >> NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM >> tank ONLINE 0 0 0 >> ad4s1g ONLINE 0 0 0 >> >> errors: No known data errors >> >> Can anyone confirm the issue? Any solutions around? >> > > Have you tried this patch > http://people.freebsd.org/~pjd/patches/vm_kern.c.2.patch ? Hmm, the patch is from Oct, 6. The Beta 3 came more than 4 weeks later. Why isn't it already applied? Are the any drawbacks with other Kernel-Parts? The other thing, that makes me a bit confused is the need of twiddling around with Kernel-Memory parameters. Maybe, the default values of 384MB seem to be a bit less as ZFS does a lot of caching in RAM. But, why breaks this up the system? Less memory may lead to a performance penalty (even to very low values) but should never made the system reboot or make it halt with a "kmem_map too small"-Message - or am i wrong? But we're in the experimental phase - so, I'll apply the mentioned patch and test it again. Thanks. Michael -- Die Erde ist die Irrenanstalt des Universums. Public Key: http://sks.keyserver.penguin.de:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x5D0A2BC3CEB 3F472
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?47541864.8050306>