DNLC seems to be independent.
>From my laptop, which has only got ZFS file systems (Two ZPOOLs), the stats
are:
$ kstat -n dnlcstats
module: unix instance: 0
name: dnlcstats class: misc
crtime 25.772681029
dir_add_abort 0
dir_add_max 0
dir_add_no_memory 0
dir_cached_current 0
dir_cached_total 0
dir_entries_cached_current 0
dir_fini_purge 0
dir_hits 0
dir_misses 0
dir_reclaim_any 0
dir_reclaim_last 0
dir_remove_entry_fail 0
dir_remove_space_fail 0
dir_start_no_memory 0
dir_update_fail 0
double_enters 256
* enters 29871
hits 5057854 <<--- Looks Good!
misses 27737*
negative_cache_hits 88995
pick_free 0
pick_heuristic 0
pick_last 0
purge_all 1
purge_fs1 0
purge_total_entries 22117
purge_vfs 79
purge_vp 74
snaptime 14043.559161769
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 12:50 PM, Marcelo Leal <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
> In ZFS the DNLC concept is gone, or is in ARC too? I mean, all the cache
> in ZFS is ARC right?
> I was thinking if we can tune the DNLC in ZFS like in UFS.. if we have too
> *many* files and directories, i guess we can have a better performance
> having all the metadata cached, and that is even more important in NFS
> operations.
> DNLC is LRU right? And ARC should be totally dynamic, but as in another
> thread here, i think reading a *big* file can mess with the whole thing. Can
> we hold an area in memory for DNLC cache, or that is not the ARC way?
>
> thanks,
>
> Leal.
> --
> This message posted from opensolaris.org
> _______________________________________________
> zfs-discuss mailing list
> zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
>
--
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
Arthur C. Clarke
My blog: http://initialprogramload.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
