[oi-dev] Plans to lower minimum memory requirements?
garrett at nexenta.com
Thu Mar 17 21:07:21 UTC 2011
One of the things that occurs in the kernel is that a substantial amount
of code is far more complex than it needs to be, and a lot of drivers
allocate far larger buffering areas than they need to (or should!)
Google on bufferbloat for a description of some of these problems,
although the problems extend far beyond just networking.
On Thu, 2011-03-17 at 21:19 +0100, Julian Wiesener wrote:
> Hi Olga,
> On 03/17/11 08:51 PM, ольга крыжановская wrote:
> > btrfs claims to use less memory than zfs but is still a COW design and
> > openSUSE with btrfs runs smoothly in a vmware box with 384MB assigned.
> > How is this possible?
> actually the ZFS, the Datacache, COW and the even more important (for
> small memory sizes) Metadatacache is not the biggest Problem here. The
> kernel it self without ZFS Caches consumes much more Memory than a
> typical Linux kernel, we would need to check if and where we can reduce
> the size (more at Illumos scope).
> (oi_148 i86pc)# echo '::memstat' | mdb -k
> Page Summary Pages MB %Tot
> ------------ ---------------- ---------------- ----
> Kernel 120290 469 23%
> Anon 166739 651 32%
> Exec and libs 6381 24 1%
> Page cache 26215 102 5%
> Free (cachelist) 66591 260 13%
> Free (freelist) 133495 521 26%
> Total 519711 2030
> Physical 519710 2030
> (oi_148 i86pc)# echo '::arc' | mdb -k
> p = 60 MB
> c = 64 MB
> c_min = 64 MB
> c_max = 481 MB
> size = 99 MB
> hdr_size = 1969824
> data_size = 64107520
> other_size = 38426984
> arc_meta_used = 99 MB
> arc_meta_limit = 120 MB
> arc_meta_max = 107 MB
> > Is there any thing else we can do to optimize Openindiana?
> Yes, the main problem is actually not ZFS or the kernel, what it really
> makes OI unusable to systems with smaller memory-size than 2GB is the
> fact. that IPS (pkg commands, as well as beadm) are consuming much
> memrory during upgrade/install. If you really want to make OI less
> memory consuming, IPS is the point to start.
> IPS is currently still developed open, people at oracle are working on
> reducing the memory footprint and we have currently no plans or need to
> fork IPS, so if you want to help in this area, i guess the best would it
> be to join the upstream project.
> Personally i really would apprechiate an effort (i really hated it to
> buy an additional 1GB DIMM for my laptop just to be able to update) to
> reduce the memory footprint of OI.
> However, OI is actually not designed to be a small-hardware-desktop
> system. There are many operation systems (even a few osol based) which
> fits better into that scope and we currently have more urgends issues.
> We are aiming on moving to illumos and create a base for a stable server
> distribution and we'll have a lot to do to archive this first priority goal.
> oi-dev mailing list
> oi-dev at openindiana.org
More information about the oi-dev