Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2015 13:13:05 -0300 From: Christopher Forgeron <csforgeron@gmail.com> To: Sean Chittenden <seanc@groupon.com> Cc: Adrian Gschwend <ml-ktk@netlabs.org>, FreeBSD Filesystems <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: FreeBSD 10.1 Memory Exhaustion Message-ID: <CAB2_NwCOwhb_S7tU5M1%2Be2rZykiSWzGhuWd73zX4FMAMVo5nyg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CACfj5vJvAz9StvjTrA1TzfS%2BMhi_qSrOc_qBNHr8qXbiAj81xw@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAB2_NwCngPqFH4q-YZk00RO_aVF9JraeSsVX3xS0z5EV3YGa1Q@mail.gmail.com> <55A3A800.5060904@denninger.net> <55A4D5B7.2030603@freebsd.org> <55A4E5AB.8060909@netlabs.org> <CACfj5vJvAz9StvjTrA1TzfS%2BMhi_qSrOc_qBNHr8qXbiAj81xw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I now have the patch on two of my production machines after early morning crashes that opened up a 'maintenance window'. With crashing happening quite regularly for months now, I think we have progress if I can make it to the end of the week crash-free. On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Sean Chittenden <seanc@groupon.com> wrote: > > > ZFS ARC *should* not require those settings, but does currently for mixed > workloads (i.e. databases) in order to be "stable". This illustrates one of my main concerns: - I shouldn't have to tweak/patch FreeBSD to keep it from being unstable. Tweaking to improve performance is perfectly fine with me, that's part of what we do as sysadmins to make the software fit the layout of the required needs. Right now stock FreeBSD is unstable for me, and I don't think my workload is unusual in any way. My smallest production machine is 48 GiB RAM on a 8 TiB Pool, and it still faults like my larger 96GiB RAM machines with larger pools. You can buy a 5 TiB drive for ~$200 - $300 now. It's well within the budget of a home user to have a 10TiB ZFS pool, and if that home user is torrenting video, they are setting up the same situations for crashing. ZFS needs to know when it's consuming swap instead of raw memory, and from what I understand, this patch allows that knowledge, and thus this patch is very important. I'll take a small, possibly performance regression to achieve stability. If we can't come together to help people who's jobs and income literally depend on keeping these boxes running, then can we do it for the common punter trying to torrent movies? :-)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAB2_NwCOwhb_S7tU5M1%2Be2rZykiSWzGhuWd73zX4FMAMVo5nyg>