Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 08:27:28 +0200 From: Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@FreeBSD.org> To: Tz-Huan Huang <tzhuan@csie.org> Cc: Dag-Erling Sm??rgrav <des@des.no>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Is there any way to increase the KVM? Message-ID: <20080605062728.GA4278@garage.freebsd.pl> In-Reply-To: <6a7033710806041053g4a5c2fdftd7202b708bff363c@mail.gmail.com> References: <6a7033710805302252v43a7b240x66ca3f5e3dd5fda4@mail.gmail.com> <20080603135308.GC3434@garage.freebsd.pl> <6a7033710806032317g4dbe8845h26a1196016b9c440@mail.gmail.com> <86zlq140x0.fsf@ds4.des.no> <6a7033710806041053g4a5c2fdftd7202b708bff363c@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--nFreZHaLTZJo0R7j
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 01:53:37AM +0800, Tz-Huan Huang wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 12:31 AM, Dag-Erling Sm??rgrav <des@des.no> wrote:
> > "Tz-Huan Huang" <tzhuan@csie.org> writes:
> >> The vfs.zfs.arc_max was set to 512M originally, the machine survived f=
or
> >> 4 days and panicked this morning. Now the vfs.zfs.arc_max is set to 64M
> >> by Oliver's suggestion, let's see how long it will survive. :-)
> >
> > des@ds4 ~% uname -a
> > FreeBSD ds4.des.no 8.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 8.0-CURRENT #27: Sat Feb 23 01:2=
4:32 CET 2008 des@ds4.des.no:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/ds4 amd64
> > des@ds4 ~% sysctl -h vm.kmem_size_min vm.kmem_size_max vm.kmem_size vfs=
.zfs.arc_min vfs.zfs.arc_max
> > vm.kmem_size_min: 1,073,741,824
> > vm.kmem_size_max: 1,073,741,824
> > vm.kmem_size: 1,073,741,824
> > vfs.zfs.arc_min: 67,108,864
> > vfs.zfs.arc_max: 536,870,912
> > des@ds4 ~% zpool list
> > NAME SIZE USED AVAIL CAP HEALTH ALTROOT
> > raid 1.45T 435G 1.03T 29% ONLINE -
> > des@ds4 ~% zfs list | wc -l
> > 210
> >
> > Haven't had a single panic in over six months.
>=20
> Thanks for your information, the major difference is that we
> runs on 7-stable and the size of our zfs pool is much bigger.
I'm don't think the panics are related to pool size. More to the load
and characteristics of your workload.
> root@cml2$ uname -a
> FreeBSD cml2.csie.ntu.edu.tw 7.0-STABLE FreeBSD 7.0-STABLE #40: Sat
> May 31 10:29:16 CST 2008
> root@cml2.csie.ntu.edu.tw:/usr/local/obj/usr/local/src/sys/CML2 amd64
> root@cml2$ sysctl -h vm.kmem_size_min vm.kmem_size_max vm.kmem_size
> vfs.zfs.arc_min vfs.zfs.arc_max
> vm.kmem_size_min: 0
> vm.kmem_size_max: 1,610,612,736
> vm.kmem_size: 1,610,612,736
> vfs.zfs.arc_min: 16,777,216
> vfs.zfs.arc_max: 67,108,864
> root@cml2$ zpool list
> NAME SIZE USED AVAIL CAP HEALTH ALTROOT
> sun 11.3T 9.03T 2.30T 79% ONLINE -
> root@cml2$ zfs list | wc -l
> 295
If we're comparing who has bigger... :)
beast:root:~# zpool list
NAME SIZE USED AVAIL CAP HEALTH ALTROOT
tank 732G 604G 128G 82% ONLINE -
but:
beast:root:~# zfs list | wc -l
1932
No panics.
PS. I'm quite sure the ZFS version I've in perforce will fix most if not
all 'kmem_map too small' panics. It's not yet committed, but I do want
to MFC it into RELENG_7.
--=20
Pawel Jakub Dawidek http://www.wheel.pl
pjd@FreeBSD.org http://www.FreeBSD.org
FreeBSD committer Am I Evil? Yes, I Am!
--nFreZHaLTZJo0R7j
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQFIR4dPForvXbEpPzQRAunQAJ9kw4ZGXadc2WLbVvflkLoRr7Zc7QCgvplM
+2y24VAv5ARhILSdVMxcffY=
=yIsd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--nFreZHaLTZJo0R7j--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080605062728.GA4278>