Now if only this worked on PSARC :-)
-John
zfs_arc_max: This is the maximum amount of memory you want the
ARC to be able to use. Note that the ARC won't
necessarily use this much memory: if other applications
need memory, the ARC will shrink to accommodate.
Alt
Dennis Clarke wrote:
Justin Gombos wrote:
There is a ZFS FAQ somewhere indicating that ZFS *appears* to hog
memory because it uses as much as it can, but it supposedly
relinquishes memory as soon as an app calls for it.
I thought that should be pointed out, though I am not quick to accept
> On Mon, 15 Jan 2007, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>
>> This has probably been asked before but is there a kernel tunable that
>> will restrict the high water mark for ZFS cache memory? This way I could
>> just grant 50% of mamory and no more. That sort of thing.
>
> Hi Dennis,
>
> Yes - see:
>
> h
On Mon, 15 Jan 2007, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>
> > Justin Gombos wrote:
> >
> >> There is a ZFS FAQ somewhere indicating that ZFS *appears* to hog
> >> memory because it uses as much as it can, but it supposedly
> >> relinquishes memory as soon as an app calls for it.
> >>
> >> I thought that should
>
>>Doesn't mean much though .. because I am able to do things and I suspect
>>free memory means very little with ZFS.
>
> You need to make sure you test with b55+ (or was it b54).
>
> There's a memory issue with b51-b54.
>
oh
well now .. that says a lot right there.
Thank you Sir Casper.
> Justin Gombos wrote:
>
>> There is a ZFS FAQ somewhere indicating that ZFS *appears* to hog
>> memory because it uses as much as it can, but it supposedly
>> relinquishes memory as soon as an app calls for it.
>>
>> I thought that should be pointed out, though I am not quick to accept
>> it myse
Justin Gombos wrote:
There is a ZFS FAQ somewhere indicating that ZFS *appears* to hog
memory because it uses as much as it can, but it supposedly
relinquishes memory as soon as an app calls for it.
I thought that should be pointed out, though I am not quick to accept
it myself. How does the k
>
>
>
> However, if you have free memory that could be use to cache something,
> then why not use some/all/most of it? I certainly expect any operating
> system to try to use as much memory as possible and if it happens to use
> it as some sort of file system backing cache, good on it...
I agr
>Doesn't mean much though .. because I am able to do things and I suspect
>free memory means very little with ZFS.
You need to make sure you test with b55+ (or was it b54).
There's a memory issue with b51-b54.
Casper
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing li
However, if you have free memory that could be use to cache something,
then why not use some/all/most of it? I certainly expect any operating
system to try to use as much memory as possible and if it happens to use
it as some sort of file system backing cache, good on it...
The real questi
>
>> * Dennis Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-01-15 16:39]:
>>>
>>> I am beginning to think that ZFS is a feature of Vista because it
>>> seems to eat all available RAM endlessly.
>>
>> There is a ZFS FAQ somewhere indicating that ZFS *appears* to hog
>> memory because it uses as much as it can
> * Dennis Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-01-15 16:39]:
>>
>> I am beginning to think that ZFS is a feature of Vista because it
>> seems to eat all available RAM endlessly.
>
> There is a ZFS FAQ somewhere indicating that ZFS *appears* to hog
> memory because it uses as much as it can, but it
* Dennis Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-01-15 16:39]:
>
> I am beginning to think that ZFS is a feature of Vista because it
> seems to eat all available RAM endlessly.
There is a ZFS FAQ somewhere indicating that ZFS *appears* to hog
memory because it uses as much as it can, but it supposedly
13 matches
Mail list logo
