From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 20 09:05:30 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4006E16A420; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 09:05:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from BORJAMAR@SARENET.ES) Received: from proxypop1.sarenet.es (proxypop1.sarenet.es [194.30.0.99]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4AE013C4A7; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 09:05:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from BORJAMAR@SARENET.ES) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (matahari.sarenet.es [192.148.167.18]) by proxypop1.sarenet.es (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E8665D77; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 11:05:26 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <46F23166.8070908@FreeBSD.org> References: <5870F83F-7174-47AA-98AE-C1DE8972E0C8@SARENET.ES> <613318C3-6B66-4758-A0D4-97405D6A1914@SARENET.ES> <46F23166.8070908@FreeBSD.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Borja Marcos Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 11:05:30 +0200 To: Kris Kennaway X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.2) Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Ivan Voras Subject: Re: Memory allocation problems (ZFS/NFS/amd64) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 09:05:30 -0000 On 20 Sep 2007, at 10:37, Kris Kennaway wrote: > Borja Marcos wrote: >> On 19 Sep 2007, at 19:35, Ivan Voras wrote: >>> Borja Marcos wrote: >>> >>>> These are not innocuous messages, the machine is rejecting >>>> connections >>>> like crazy. Any ideas? >>>> The number of established TCP connections was around 490, and the >>>> machine has 2 GB of RAM. >>> >>> Just a guess: what is your vm.kmem_size_max and have you tried >>> increasing it? >> It's the first thing I thought, and I cranked it to a very high >> value just in case: >> vm.kmem_size_max: 1073741824 > > You actually wanted to tune vm.kmem_size too or it may not actually > change the value used (_max is just a ceiling for autotuning). > However if this is i386 you can't set it that high without also > adjusting KVA_PAGES too (which has other effects). It's an amd64. I understand that i386 is mostly out of the question if I want to play reasonably safe with ZFS :) Oh, ok. I will try with both, then. Should I try the same value? Perhaps it's a bit high, but I understand that with a 64 bit address space I can set it sort of arbitrarily high without many side effects. Thank you very much, Borja. ---------------- "The thing he realised about the windows was this: because they had been converted into openable windows after they had first been designed to be impregnable, they were, in fact, much less secure than if they had been designed as openable windows in the first place." Douglas Adams, "Mostly Harmless"