On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 10:40:41AM -0700, David Bustos wrote: > Quoth Stuart Anderson on Sun, Oct 21, 2007 at 07:09:10PM -0700: > > Running 102 parallel "zfs destroy -r" commands on an X4500 running S10U4 has > > resulted in "No more processes" errors in existing login shells for several > > minutes of time, but then fork() calls started working again. However, none > > of the zfs destroy processes have actually completed yet, which is odd since > > some of the filesystems are trivially small. > ... > > Is this a known issue? Any ideas on what resource lots of zfs commands use > > up to prevent fork() from working? > > ZFS is known to use a lot of memory. I suspect this problem has > diminished in recent Nevada builds. Can you try this on Nevada?
I suspect it is more subtle than this since top was reporting that none of the available swap space was being used yet, so there was 16GB of free VM. Unfortunately, I am not currently in a position to switch this system over to Nevada. Thanks. -- Stuart Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ligo.caltech.edu/~anderson _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
