From owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Wed Jul 15 20:21:33 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9C109A2082 for ; Wed, 15 Jul 2015 20:21:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wjw@digiware.nl) Received: from smtp.digiware.nl (smtp.digiware.nl [31.223.170.169]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 97A931ED0; Wed, 15 Jul 2015 20:21:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wjw@digiware.nl) Received: from rack1.digiware.nl (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.digiware.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86342153431; Wed, 15 Jul 2015 22:21:21 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at digiware.nl Received: from smtp.digiware.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by rack1.digiware.nl (rack1.digiware.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XUz8g5rF6mx0; Wed, 15 Jul 2015 22:20:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [IPv6:2001:4cb8:3:1:6994:6919:ad85:1cbb] (unknown [IPv6:2001:4cb8:3:1:6994:6919:ad85:1cbb]) by smtp.digiware.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPA id A21E715340A; Wed, 15 Jul 2015 22:20:51 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Re: FreeBSD 10.1 Memory Exhaustion To: Mark Felder , Sean Chittenden , Adrian Gschwend References: <55A3A800.5060904@denninger.net> <55A4D5B7.2030603@freebsd.org> <55A4E5AB.8060909@netlabs.org> <1436989410.1427298.324703241.421E814B@webmail.messagingengine.com> Cc: FreeBSD Filesystems From: Willem Jan Withagen Message-ID: <55A6C0A4.1030300@digiware.nl> Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 22:20:52 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1436989410.1427298.324703241.421E814B@webmail.messagingengine.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 20:21:33 -0000 On 15/07/2015 21:43, Mark Felder wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 14, 2015, at 10:10, Sean Chittenden wrote: >> I think the reason this is not seen more often is because people >> frequently >> throw limits on the arc in /boot/loader.conf: >> >> vfs.zfs.arc_min="18G" >> vfs.zfs.arc_max="149G" >> >> ZFS ARC *should* not require those settings, but does currently for mixed >> workloads (i.e. databases) in order to be "stable". By setting fixed >> sizes >> on the ARC, UMA and ARC are much more cooperative in that they have their >> own memory regions to manage so this behavior is not seen as often. >> >> To be clear, however, it should not be necessary to set parameters like >> these in /boot/loader.conf in order to obtain consistent operational >> behavior. I'd be curious to know if someone running 10.2 BETA without >> patches is able to trigger this behavior or not. There was work done >> that >> reported helped with this between 10.1 and now. To what extent it >> helped, >> however, I don't have any advice yet. >> > > I was about to email "I have 12TB at home and 4GB of RAM with a very > erratic workload and never run into any issues" and then I looked at > /boot/loader.conf and saw vfs.zfs.arc_max="2G" > > Now I'm too scared to turn it off... :-) Same here. Just a leftover of all the advise to limit arc in the past. Just bit the bullit: installed BETA1, killed the settings and rebooted. We'll see what comes of it. --WjW