On Fri, 27 Aug 2010 20:34:18 -0700 Artem Belevich <fbsdl...@src.cx> wrote:
> Perhaps reduced UMA fragmentation helps those subsystem that do use > UMA (including ZFS which always uses uma for various housekeeping > data). PJD told me once that ZFS is always using UMA, it is just not using it for everything (except when the sysctl is switched to use it for everything). FYI: I have a 9-current system which panics (without a backtrace/dump) after 1-2 days of uptime when the zfs-uma-sysctl is activated. When it is not activated it survives several weeks (let's say about a month). So any work on the UMA fragmentation issue is well spend time. No, I haven't tested any of the patches on this machine. Bye, Alexander. _______________________________________________ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
