Darren J Moffat writes: > Steven Sim wrote: > > Casper; > > > > Does this mean it would be a good practice to say increase the amount of > > memory and/or swap space we usually recommend if the customer intends to > > use ZFS very heavily? > > ZFS doesn't necessarily use more memory (physical or virtual) than UFS > it needs more VM *address space* (not the same as more VM) hence the 64 > bit processor. > > -- > Darren J Moffat > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
I concur and add 2 things: there is somewhat of a bug today in which ZFS allows application to dirty too much memory before being throttled. I mention this because, it's the issue that has created the notion the ZFS needs more ram; it does not. With better application throttling in place, this urban legend will debunk itself. Next, I'm not VM expert, but since ZFS does reference cached data in the kernel, I do think that it's a best practice to configure some extra swap to account for these larger kernels. -r _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
