Re: [zfs-discuss] problems with l2arc in 2009.06

2009-06-18 Thread Richard Elling
Ethan Erchinger wrote: > correct ratio of arc to l2arc? from http://blogs.sun.com/brendan/entry/l2arc_screenshots Thanks Rob. Hmm...that ratio isn't awesome. TANSTAAFL A good SWAG is about 200 bytes for L2ARC directory in the ARC for each record in the L2ARC. So if your recordsize

Re: [zfs-discuss] problems with l2arc in 2009.06

2009-06-18 Thread Ethan Erchinger
> > > correct ratio of arc to l2arc? > > from http://blogs.sun.com/brendan/entry/l2arc_screenshots > Thanks Rob. Hmm...that ratio isn't awesome. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-

Re: [zfs-discuss] problems with l2arc in 2009.06

2009-06-18 Thread Rob Logan
> correct ratio of arc to l2arc? from http://blogs.sun.com/brendan/entry/l2arc_screenshots "It costs some DRAM to reference the L2ARC, at a rate proportional to record size. For example, it currently takes about 15 Gbytes of DRAM to reference 600 Gbytes of L2ARC - at an 8 Kbyte ZFS record size

Re: [zfs-discuss] problems with l2arc in 2009.06

2009-06-17 Thread Ethan Erchinger
> This is a mysql database server, so if you are wondering about the > smallish arc size, it's being artificially limited by "set > zfs:zfs_arc_max = 0x8000" in /etc/system, so that the majority of > ram can be allocated to InnoDb. > I was told offline that it's likely because my arc size ha