From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Aug 28 20:35:54 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24E6E72A
 for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 20:35:54 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from robert.burmeister@utoledo.edu)
Received: from sam.nabble.com (sam.nabble.com [216.139.236.26])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0613E2615
 for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 20:35:53 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [192.168.236.26] (helo=sam.nabble.com)
 by sam.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
 (envelope-from <robert.burmeister@utoledo.edu>) id 1VEmT2-0007Hb-Vv
 for freebsd-stable@freebsd.org; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 13:35:52 -0700
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 13:35:52 -0700 (PDT)
From: Robert_Burmeister <robert.burmeister@utoledo.edu>
To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <1377722152984-5839755.post@n5.nabble.com>
In-Reply-To: <kvkh1j$7fj$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <521C9E85.4060801@UToledo.edu>
 <CAE-mSOLCYRM0LRLRgmaEZN1u5ozttJZC3kWtw3Zarqik1N29zw@mail.gmail.com>
 <521D7552.5080008@UToledo.edu> <kvkh1j$7fj$1@ger.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: Suggest changing dirhash defaults for FreeBSD 9.2.
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-stable>,
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 20:35:54 -0000


>>>> I believe that increasing the following values by 10 would benefit
>>>> most FreeBSD users without disadvantage.
>>>>
>>>> vfs.ufs.dirhash_maxmem: 2097152 to 20971520
>>>>
>>>> vfs.ufs.dirhash_reclaimage: 5 to 50 or 60
>>> vfs.ufs.dirhash_maxmem is further autotuned based on available
>>> physical memory.
>>> See r214359 for details.
>>>
> 
> To what value does the algorithm tune in your case? On my 16 GB machine,
> it's ~~ 25 MB:
> 
> vfs.ufs.dirhash_maxmem: 26968064
> 
> The policy is to use fractions of the installed RAM (though in a
> roundabout way), so it should scale reasonably well to both systems with
> large and small memories.
> 
> I'll bump vfs.ufs.dirhash_reclaimage to 60, it's worth it.

I'm running 2 Gigs of RAM, so it sets to 2 Megs.
As compiling most of the system uses ~1.5 Gigs, I can certainly use the
cache.

Note that allocated kernel memory does not scale linearly with physical RAM,
so a policy to use fractions of kernel memory may be more appropriate.

~25 Megs is a good value, however, as the reclaim value is a portion of 
vfs.ufs.dirhash_maxmem, a much larger cache and it becomes pyric
as it can keep wiping out a small active cache.

(I tested vfs.ufs.dirhash_maxmem up to 60 megs.)




--
View this message in context: http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/Suggest-changing-dirhash-defaults-for-FreeBSD-9-2-tp5839351p5839755.html
Sent from the freebsd-stable mailing list archive at Nabble.com.