On 19.08.2013 18:09, Outback Dingo wrote:
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 12:05 PM, Alfred Perlstein <alf...@ixsystems.com <mailto:alf...@ixsystems.com>> wrote: Performance is bad for large memory requirements period. Vnodes and mbufs on a machine with 24gb ram is limited to the same amount as a machine with less than 4GB ram. This was fixed in head but not merged back in time. is there a patch set i can backport on my own, do we know what revision(s) are required? Ive got boxes with 128GB and 10Gbe Intel....... so im willing to do some work......
I have committed it to 9-stable this morning with r254515. No backporting necessary. -- Andre
This results in poor out of the box performance on 10gige and servers with high vnode requirements. Sent from my iPhone On Aug 19, 2013, at 7:30 AM, Outback Dingo <outbackdi...@gmail.com <mailto:outbackdi...@gmail.com>> wrote:On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Alfred Perlstein <alf...@ixsystems.com <mailto:alf...@ixsystems.com>> wrote: On Aug 19, 2013, at 2:52 AM, Andre Oppermann <an...@freebsd.org <mailto:an...@freebsd.org>> wrote: > On 16.08.2013 10:29, Andre Oppermann wrote: >> On 16.08.2013 08:32, Alfred Perlstein wrote: >>> Andre, I'm kind of bummed out this didn't make it into 9.2, I'm wondering can I commit this to >>> 9-stable now? (or is it already in?) >> >> It didn't make it because there was only sparse feedback after the >> call for testers. There were a couple of replies that it is being >> tested but no statements either way if it was good or not. Hence >> I erred on the side of caution and refrained from committing it. > > Revisiting the history of this after vacation absence actually shows > that we straddled the release code freeze deadline and you had provided > good testing feedback. However the MFC got rejected by RE on the fear > of introducing unknown regressions into the release process. > >>> Would you do the honors? >> >> Yes, will do later today. > > Committed to stable/9 as r254515. > > Let me know if there are any issues. Thanks Andre. Maybe we can do a point release/patch release with this in a few weeks for 9.2.1 or 9.2p1 because 9.2 out of the box performance is abysmal not only in networking but also disk as maxvnodes is clipped way too small even with plenty of ram. So your saying, 9.2-RELEASE performance suffers degradation against say 9.1 ?? are you referring to with this patch enabled? or just in general 9.2-RELEASE > > -- > Andre > _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org <mailto:freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org>"
_______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
