| From | Sent On | Attachments |
|---|---|---|
| Jeremy Chadwick | Oct 30, 2008 8:31 pm | |
| Danny Carroll | Oct 30, 2008 9:07 pm | |
| Jeremy Chadwick | Oct 30, 2008 9:33 pm | |
| Andrew Snow | Oct 30, 2008 9:43 pm | |
| Danny Carroll | Oct 30, 2008 9:47 pm | |
| Danny Carroll | Oct 30, 2008 9:49 pm | |
| Danny Carroll | Oct 30, 2008 9:54 pm | |
| Simun Mikecin | Oct 31, 2008 2:20 am | |
| Simun Mikecin | Oct 31, 2008 4:56 am | |
| Peter Schuller | Nov 2, 2008 7:08 am | |
| Simun Mikecin | Nov 3, 2008 12:31 am | |
| Dieter | Nov 12, 2008 2:57 pm | |
| Danny Carroll | Nov 12, 2008 9:46 pm | |
| Jeremy Chadwick | Nov 12, 2008 11:42 pm | |
| Willem Jan Withagen | Nov 13, 2008 12:32 am | |
| Danny Carroll | Nov 13, 2008 3:09 am | |
| Danny Carroll | Nov 13, 2008 5:58 am | |
| Nikolay Denev | Nov 13, 2008 7:05 am | |
| Scott Long | Nov 13, 2008 8:49 am | |
| Danny Carroll | Nov 13, 2008 12:46 pm | |
| Danny Carroll | Nov 13, 2008 12:59 pm | |
| Eirik Øverby | Nov 16, 2008 12:26 pm | |
| Danny Carroll | Nov 16, 2008 7:15 pm | |
| Matt Simerson | Nov 16, 2008 10:06 pm | |
| Jeremy Chadwick | Nov 16, 2008 11:07 pm | |
| Wes Morgan | Nov 17, 2008 3:26 am | |
| Danny Carroll | Nov 17, 2008 3:42 am | |
| Matt Simerson | Nov 17, 2008 1:04 pm | |
| Matt Simerson | Nov 17, 2008 2:07 pm | |
| Danny Carroll | Nov 17, 2008 3:45 pm | |
| Jan Mikkelsen | Dec 2, 2008 2:38 am | |
| Wes Morgan | Dec 2, 2008 4:04 am | |
| Danny Carroll | Jan 7, 2009 4:33 pm | |
| Zaphod Beeblebrox | Jan 7, 2009 11:40 pm | |
| Koen Smits | Jan 7, 2009 11:48 pm | |
| Nikolay Denev | Jan 8, 2009 1:19 am | |
| Danny Carroll | Jan 8, 2009 6:29 pm | |
| Koen Smits | Jan 9, 2009 12:46 am | |
| Danny Carroll | Jan 9, 2009 1:02 am | |
| Koen Smits | Jan 9, 2009 7:57 am | |
| Andrew Snow | Jan 9, 2009 6:38 pm | |
| Danny Carroll | Jan 9, 2009 8:58 pm | |
| Danny Carroll | Jan 20, 2009 10:40 pm | |
| Koen Smits | Jan 21, 2009 1:15 am | |
| Danny Carroll | Jan 21, 2009 5:14 am |
| Subject: | Re: Areca vs. ZFS performance testing. | |
|---|---|---|
| From: | Simun Mikecin (numi...@yahoo.com) | |
| Date: | Oct 31, 2008 2:20:36 am | |
| List: | org.freebsd.freebsd-fs | |
Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
The tuning variables I advocate for a system with 2GB of RAM or more, on RELENG_7, are: vm.kmem_size="1536M" vm.kmem_size_max="1536M"
There is no point in setting vm.kmem_size_max. Setting vm.kmem_size is enough. vm.kmem_size_max is used for auto-tuning of kmem size which is in this case actually overriden by manually setting vm.kmem_size.
vfs.zfs.arc_min="16M" vfs.zfs.arc_max="64M" vfs.zfs.prefetch_disable="1" You can gradually increase arc_min and arc_max by ~16MB increments as you see fit; you should see general performance improvements as they get larger (more data being kept in the ARC), but don't get too crazy. I've tuned arc_max up to 128MB before with success, but I don't want to try anything larger without decreasing kmem_size_*.
Can you explain why would you have to decrease kmem_size to use larger ARC? AFAIK it should be contrary to what you are saying: when you use larger kmem_size you can also use larger arc_max.
My suggestion if you are using kmem_size of 1536M would be to not tune arc_min and arc_max if your system isn't panicing. If it does you should try decreasing arc_max (from it's default value) until it doesn't.
_______________________________________________ free...@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs To unsubscribe, send any mail to "free...@freebsd.org"





