Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches for "arc_buf_ts".
Did you mean:
arc_buf_t
2008 Jan 16
1
Understanding the ARC - arc_buf_hdr and arc_buf_t
...aptive replacement cache (arc). I see there are arc_bufs and arc_buf_hdrs. Each arc_buf_hdr points to an arc_buf_t. The arc_buf_t is really one entry in a list of arc_buf_t entries. The multiple entries are accessed through the arc_buf_t?s b_next member.
Why does the arc_buf_hdr point to a list of arc_buf_ts and not just one arc_buf_t, i.e., how and why do multiple arc_buf_ts get inserted into this list?
What is the relationship between arc_buf_hdr?s b_datacnt and b_refcnt? Is b_datacnt the number of arc_buf_ts in the list? Does the b_refcnt keep track of all users of all arc_buf_ts in the list?
Tha...
2006 Nov 02
11
ZFS and memory usage.
ZFS works really stable on FreeBSD, but I''m biggest problem is how to
control ZFS memory usage. I''ve no idea how to leash that beast.
FreeBSD has a backpresure mechanism. I can register my function so it
will be called when there are memory problems, which I do. I using it
for ARC layer.
Even with this in place under heavy load the kernel panics, because
memory with KM_SLEEP
2006 Nov 09
16
Some performance questions with ZFS/NFS/DNLC at snv_48
Hello.
We''re currently using a Sun Blade1000 (2x750MHz, 1G ram, 2x160MB/s mpt
scsi buses, skge GigE network) as a NFS backend with ZFS for
distribution of free software like Debian (cdimage.debian.org,
ftp.se.debian.org) and have run into some performance issues.
We are running SX snv_48 and have run with a raidz2 with 7x300G for a
while now, just added another 7x300G raidz2 today but
2006 Mar 20
1
ARC cache issues with b35/b36; Bugs 6397610 / 6398177
> Bug ID: 6398177
> Synopsis: zfs: poor nightly build performance in 32-bit mode (high disk activity)
Part of the problem appear to be these kmem_caches:
# mdb -k
...
> ::kmastat
cache buf buf buf memory alloc alloc
name size in use total in use succeed fail
------------------------- ------ ------ ------ ---------
2007 May 29
6
Deterioration with zfs performace and recent zfs bits?
Has anyone else noticed a significant zfs performance deterioration
when running recent opensolaris bits?
My 32-bit / 768 MB Toshiba Tecra S1 notebook was able to do a
full opensolaris release build in ~ 4 hours 45 minutes (gcc shadow
compilation disabled; using an lzjb compressed zpool / zfs on a
single notebook hdd p-ata drive).
After upgrading to 2007-05-25 opensolaris release bits