Re: ZFS/RAIDZ and SAMBA: abyssimal performance
Garrett Cooper wrote: > On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Fabian Keil > wrote: > > While I agree that the values are system dependant the purpose of > > the tunables could still be documented together with a description > > of how to properly test that they have any effect at all and that > > it's an improvement compared to the defaults. > > > > Scarce ZFS tuning documentation is also a problem upstream which > > probably doesn't help. > > The documentation is there (see the Evil ZFS Tuning Guide, etc), the > problem is that our OS is Solaris so the directions do not directly > apply. I was actually referring to the "Evil ZFS Tuning Guide" which, while helpful, doesn't come close to completely documenting the tunables that exist and in my opinion also doesn't really address the testing issue. Obviously I don't expect anyone else to benchmark my own systems for me, but more information about the expected effects would allow me to test more efficiently. The fact that it targets Solaris and that the directions don't apply directly never bothered me so far and I think the existing parts are pretty good in general. Fabian signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: clang 3.2 RC2 miscompiles libgcc?
On Fri, Jan 04, 2013 at 10:23:34PM +0200, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > > Thank you for digging more. > > In fact, it is more likely that there is some bug or incompatibility in > c++ unwinder than in the libgcc itself, but as you noted, a compiler bug > is also possible. > > Anyway, I was mostly looking could the backtrace starts in rtld. Rtld bug > also cannot be excluded at this stage, but it not much likely. FWIW, the diff between working and non-working assembler can be found at http://people.freebsd.org/~stefanf/tmp/libgcc_s.s.diff . Not that I expect much from that. Stefan ___ 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"
Re: ZFS/RAIDZ and SAMBA: abyssimal performance
On 4 Jan 2013, at 20:39, Rick Macklem wrote: > What about capturing a few examples, like this one for a system with > 16Gb of Ram. Basically cases of: > - this is my hardware config and here's what works well for me > It's pretty easy for people to choose the example closest to their > setup as a starting point. This would be very helpful. One of the longer-term goals for the storage stack is to make all of these things self-tuning, and some well-tested data points showing system configuration, workload, and performance would be a good starting point for this. David ___ 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"
