From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AFCD26AC9B for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2021 10:23:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 984CC2984F for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2021 10:22:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from relay10.mail.gandi.net (relay10.mail.gandi.net [217.70.178.230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 0C81E29844 for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2021 10:22:34 +0100 (CET) Received: from chazelas.org (unknown [94.10.127.123]) (Authenticated sender: stephane@chazelas.org) by relay10.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E166D240008; Sun, 24 Jan 2021 09:22:27 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2021 09:22:26 +0000 From: Stephane CHAZELAS To: Bruce Wainer Cc: Proxmox VE development discussion Message-ID: <20210124092226.dghkhgmmkvffwyuc@chazelas.org> References: <20210119144235.54f7jofljgjqpbts@chazelas.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.641 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL 0.5 SPF set to ?all KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW -0.7 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, low trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 25 Jan 2021 10:16:13 +0100 Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH] ZFS ARC size not taken into account by pvestatd or ksmtuned X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2021 09:23:05 -0000 2021-01-23 04:14:52 -0500, Bruce Wainer: [...] > Alternatively if you are not willing to go through the steps of submitting > this yourself, we might be able to work things out so I can submit it. [...] Hi Bruce, yes please. That's a very simple change. The idea is just to count the ARC size as buffer/cache like the rest of the buffer/ cache. It doesn't really matter much how it's done exactly. I use git rarely enough that it always me hours to get back into it. I see that ksmtuned is actually upstream at RedHat so I suppose Proxmox will likely want to add the change as an extra debian patch. I think I should point out that I've not revisited that issue in years. And at the time the aim was to quickly address the issue for our specific use case. There may be better ways to address it these days. In particular, I'm not sure why the kernel doesn't account the ARC in buffers/cache in the first place, maybe that's customisable now. I've not had a look at that /proc/pressure thing referenced in the latest commit of ProcFSTools either. But in any case, the patch I submitted has proved to be an improvement for us. Cheers, Stephane