Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 21:24:55 -0700 From: "Kip Macy" <kip.macy@gmail.com> To: "Zaphod Beeblebrox" <zbeeble@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org, Thomas Vogt <freebsdlists@bsdunix.ch> Subject: Re: vm_thread_new: kstack allocation failed with many ZFS FS and NFSD Message-ID: <b1fa29170803102124i445ab5b7j6f1a458f25c204c4@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5f67a8c40803101813k3a2b790dk57b67bc2d6f85d17@mail.gmail.com> References: <47D544B1.6070806@bsdunix.ch> <47D5D2B2.90202@FreeBSD.org> <5f67a8c40803101813k3a2b790dk57b67bc2d6f85d17@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 6:13 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <zbeeble@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 8:30 PM, Kris Kennaway <kris@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > > Your kernel has run out of memory. If you cannot tune kmem_size further > > then it cannot handle this many ZFS filesystems. > > > Roughly how much kernel memory does a filesystem use (even if inactive) --- > or did you really mean something like too many pools? > > The ZFS documentation encourages creating filesystems for everything. I > think my (rather beafy) laptop has 20 filesystems now for various tasks --- > but I didn't realize there was a non-trivial cost (that is: a cost beyond > the mount structure, root vnodes and whatnot)... There may be kernel threads created for each file system. One way to look at it is that a process isn't that expensive, but FreeBSD probably couldn't cope very well with 5000 processes. -Kip
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?b1fa29170803102124i445ab5b7j6f1a458f25c204c4>