status of autotuning freebsd for 9.2

[Andre Oppermann]

On 19.08.2013 18:09, Outback Dingo wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 12:05 PM, Alfred Perlstein <alfred at ixsystems.com
> <mailto:alfred at 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 <outbackdingo at gmail.com
>     <mailto:outbackdingo at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>     On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Alfred Perlstein <alfred at ixsystems.com
>>     <mailto:alfred at ixsystems.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>         On Aug 19, 2013, at 2:52 AM, Andre Oppermann <andre at freebsd.org
>>         <mailto:andre at 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 at freebsd.org <mailto:freebsd-stable at freebsd.org> mailing list
>>         http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
>>         To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe at freebsd.org
>>         <mailto:freebsd-stable-unsubscribe at freebsd.org>"
>>
>>
>