From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Nov 4 10:12:59 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB42316A41A for ; Sun, 4 Nov 2007 10:12:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Received: from weak.local (pointyhat.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::2b]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DDD013C494; Sun, 4 Nov 2007 10:12:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <472D9B2A.5080900@FreeBSD.org> Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 11:12:58 +0100 From: Kris Kennaway User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Macintosh/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Peter Schuller References: <200711021208.25913.Thomas.Sparrevohn@btinternet.com> <20071103164231.GB23714@outcold.yadt.co.uk> <200711040948.25732.peter.schuller@infidyne.com> In-Reply-To: <200711040948.25732.peter.schuller@infidyne.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS Hangs X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 10:12:59 -0000 Peter Schuller wrote: >> For example, pkg_delete seems to be _extremely_ slow and ^T reports that >> it is stuck waiting on zfs:(&zio->io_cv) for an unreasonable (IMO) amount >> of time. > > FWIW, I have seen pkg_install (and possibly other pkg_* tools) being extremely > slow seemingly as a result of the active set of files it touches exceededing > the amount cached. In particular I had this problem after converting to ZFS, > but prior to switching to amd64 and more RAM. > > It would sit and churn on disk I/O forever, entirely seek bound. Tracing the > processes showed it traversing the package database over and over (presumably > recursively following dependencies or some such). So the same files were > touched any number of times. As a result, with too little cached, runtime > exploded (it took hours and hours upgrading my desktop using *binary* > pre-built packages because the larger packages with a lot of dependencies > would take forever to install and delete). It certainly could be a caching effect but the particular problem you were seeing should have been fixed. Are you still seeing it? Can the OP report whether e.g. gstat shows disk activity? Kris