Hi Guys, After reading through the discussion on this regarding ZFS memory fragmentation on snv_53 (and forward) and going through our ::kmastat...looks like ZFS is sucking down about 544 MB of RAM in the various caches. About 360MB of that is in the zio_buf_65536 cache. Next most notable is 55MB in zio_buf_32768, and 36MB in zio_buf_16384. I don't think that's too bad but worth keeping track of. At this point our kernel memory growth seems to have slowed, with it hovering around 5GB, and the anon column is mostly what's growing now (as expected...MySQL).
Most of the problem in the discussion thread on this seemed to be related to a lot of DLNC entries due to the workload of a file server. How would this affect a database server with operations in only a couple very large files? Thank you in advance. Best Regards, Jason On 1/10/07, Jason J. W. Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sanjeev & Robert, Thanks guys. We put that in place last night and it seems to be doing a lot better job of consuming less RAM. We set it to 4GB and each of our 2 MySQL instances on the box to a max of 4GB. So hopefully slush of 4GB on the Thumper is enough. I would be interested in what the other ZFS modules memory behaviors are. I'll take a perusal through the archives. In general it seems to me that a max cap for ZFS whether set through a series of individual tunables or a single root tunable would be very helpful. Best Regards, Jason On 1/10/07, Sanjeev Bagewadi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jason, > > Robert is right... > > The point is ARC is the caching module of ZFS and majority of the memory > is consumed through ARC. > Hence by limiting the c_max of ARC we are limiting the amount ARC consumes. > > However, other modules of ZFS would consume more but that may not be as > significant as ARC. > > Expert, please correct me if I am wrong here. > > Thanks and regards, > Sanjeev. > > Robert Milkowski wrote: > > >Hello Jason, > > > >Tuesday, January 9, 2007, 10:28:12 PM, you wrote: > > > >JJWW> Hi Sanjeev, > > > >JJWW> Thank you! I was not able to find anything as useful on the subject as > >JJWW> that! We are running build 54 on an X4500, would I be correct in my > >JJWW> reading of that article that if I put "set zfs:zfs_arc_max = > >JJWW> 0x100000000 #4GB" in my /etc/system, ZFS will consume no more than > >JJWW> 4GB? Thank you in advance. > > > >That's the idea however it's not working that way now - under some > >circumstances ZFS could still consume much more memory - see other > >posts lately here. > > > > > > > > > -- > Solaris Revenue Products Engineering, > India Engineering Center, > Sun Microsystems India Pvt Ltd. > Tel: x27521 +91 80 669 27521 > >
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
