Re: [zfs-discuss] RC1 Zfs writes a lot slower when running X
>Great it worker, > >mlockall returned -1 probably because the system wasn't able to allocate >blocks of 512M contiguous ly... but using memset for each blocks commited the memory and I saw the same zfs perf problem as w ith X & Vbox. You need to be have the proper privilege. Ordinary users cannot lock memory. Casper ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] RC1 Zfs writes a lot slower when running X
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008, zerk wrote: > I have OpenSolaris on an Amd64 Asus-A8NE with 2gig of Rams and 4x320 gig sata > drives in raidz1. > > With dd, I can write at quasi disk maximum speed of 80meg each for a total of > 250meg/s if I have no Xsession at all (only console tty). > > But as soon as I have an Xsession running, the write speed drops to > about 120MB/s. Its even worse if I have a VBoxHeadless running with > an idle win2k3 inside. It drops to 30 MB/s. I believe that the OpenSolaris kernel is now extended such that it reports file change events to Gnome for files in the user's home directory. When Gnome hears about a change, then it goes and reads the file so that searching is fast and there is a nice per-generated thumbnail. This means that there is more than simple memory consumption going on. Try writing into the same pool but outside of your home directory and see if the I/O rate improves. If it does, then go complain on the Desktop list. I already complained in advance on the Desktop list but where was little response (as usual) so I have since unsubscribed. Bob == Bob Friesenhahn [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] RC1 Zfs writes a lot slower when running X
Great it worker, mlockall returned -1 probably because the system wasn't able to allocate blocks of 512M contiguously... but using memset for each blocks commited the memory and I saw the same zfs perf problem as with X & Vbox. Thanks a lot for the hint :) Now I guess i'll have to buy more RAM :) zerk -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] RC1 Zfs writes a lot slower when running X
>Hi, > >thanks for the reply > >I though that was that too, so I wrote a C program that allocated 1 gig of >ram doing nothing with it. So the system was left with only 1 gig for ZFS >and I saw absolutely no performance hit. Lock it in memory and then try again; if you allocate the memory but you don't use it, you only have a swap reservation, nothing more. But if you allocate and then run mlockall(MCL_CURRENT), you take 1GB of the table. Casper ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] RC1 Zfs writes a lot slower when running X
Hi, thanks for the reply I though that was that too, so I wrote a C program that allocated 1 gig of ram doing nothing with it. So the system was left with only 1 gig for ZFS and I saw absolutely no performance hit. I tried the same thing for the CPU by doing a loop and taking 100% on one of the 2 core I have. Same thing... no hit at all. I think it have something to do with system calls, kernel or some like that but I don't know enough on that to be able to diagnose such a problem... The video card I have in there is an old Matrox G200 PCI because this is all I got left and because I didn't need anything better than that on a server. I disabled the console X server and I only connect via Xvnc server so I would be really surprise if Xvnc is doing something with that card but we never know... Thanks Zerk -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] RC1 Zfs writes a lot slower when running X
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 11:33 PM, zerk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > I have OpenSolaris on an Amd64 Asus-A8NE with 2gig of Rams and 4x320 gig > sata drives in raidz1. > > With dd, I can write at quasi disk maximum speed of 80meg each for a total > of 250meg/s if I have no Xsession at all (only console tty). > > But as soon as I have an Xsession running, the write speed drops to about > 120MB/s. > Its even worse if I have a VBoxHeadless running with an idle win2k3 inside. > It drops to 30 MB/s. > > The CPU is at 0% in both cases and nothing is using the array either. I > tried to investigate with DTrace without success... > > Anyone have a clue of what could be going on? > > Thanks > > Zerk > -- > Ya, you're using gobs of ram that was normally being used by zfs for caching. I would venture to guess if you stuck another 2GB ram in there you'd see far less of a *hit* from X or a VM. --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] RC1 Zfs writes a lot slower when running X
Hi, I have OpenSolaris on an Amd64 Asus-A8NE with 2gig of Rams and 4x320 gig sata drives in raidz1. With dd, I can write at quasi disk maximum speed of 80meg each for a total of 250meg/s if I have no Xsession at all (only console tty). But as soon as I have an Xsession running, the write speed drops to about 120MB/s. Its even worse if I have a VBoxHeadless running with an idle win2k3 inside. It drops to 30 MB/s. The CPU is at 0% in both cases and nothing is using the array either. I tried to investigate with DTrace without success... Anyone have a clue of what could be going on? Thanks Zerk -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
