On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 02:20:09PM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 2:08 PM Adam Williamson
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 2021-01-28 at 13:46 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> > >
> > > OK I'm seeing this problem in a VM with
> > > Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-Rawhide-20210128.n.0.iso
* Alexander Bokovoy:
> This is a good note. If zram breaks kernel API promise to user space
> (/proc/meminfo is one such API), how can it be enabled by default. I
> also would question enabling zram by default if it does not play along
> with cgroups. We do depend on cgroups being properly
On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 4:29 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> (One possible direction: one thing I want to explore next is using zram
> or zwap based on whether the machine has a physical swap device. Maybe
> such a language would be useful then — with additional variables
> specifying
On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 2:08 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2021-01-28 at 13:46 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> >
> > OK I'm seeing this problem in a VM with
> > Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-Rawhide-20210128.n.0.iso but I'm not
> > sure how consistent it is yet. MemTotal is ~3G for a VM
On Thu, 2021-01-28 at 13:46 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> OK I'm seeing this problem in a VM with
> Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-Rawhide-20210128.n.0.iso but I'm not
> sure how consistent it is yet. MemTotal is ~3G for a VM that has 4G
> allocated. Something's wrong...
>
> VM
On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 1:46 PM Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> VM 5.11.0-0.rc5.20210127git2ab38c17aac1.136.fc34.x86_64
> [0.701792] Memory: 3016992K/4190656K available (43019K kernel
> code, 11036K rwdata, 27184K rodata, 5036K init, 31780K bss, 1173408K
> reserved, 0K cma-reserved)
>
> Baremetal
On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 12:34 PM Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
>
> On to, 28 tammi 2021, Chris Murphy wrote:
> >> >> > ram + zram + in-memory-zwap in the check.
> >> >>
> >> >> For bare metal IPA uses the python3-psutil call:
> >> >> psutil.virtual_memory.available()
> >> >>
> >> >> I don't know
On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 11:52 AM Adam Williamson
wrote:
>
> Probably relevant - we log the output of `free` shortly after system
> install. Up to and including Fedora-Rawhide-20210124.n.0 , it looked
> approximately like this:
>
> totalusedfree shared
On to, 28 tammi 2021, Chris Murphy wrote:
>> > ram + zram + in-memory-zwap in the check.
>>
>> For bare metal IPA uses the python3-psutil call:
>> psutil.virtual_memory.available()
>>
>> I don't know how/if psutil reports zram (or cgroup v1 and v2 for that
>> matter).
>
> psutil (in general)
On Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 11:11 AM Alexander Bokovoy
wrote:
> On to, 28 tammi 2021, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> >On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 11:04:34AM -0500, Rob Crittenden wrote:
> >> Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 03:20:38PM +0200, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> >> >> With
On Thu, 2021-01-28 at 10:18 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-01-28 at 14:16 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 03:20:38PM +0200, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> > > With today's OpenQA tests I can point out that using zram on 2048MB RAM
> > > VMs actually
On Thu, 2021-01-28 at 14:16 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 03:20:38PM +0200, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> > With today's OpenQA tests I can point out that using zram on 2048MB RAM
> > VMs actually breaks FreeIPA deployment:
> >
On to, 28 tammi 2021, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 6:21 AM Alexander Bokovoy <[1]aboko...@redhat.com>
wrote:
With
On to, 28 tammi 2021, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 11:04:34AM -0500, Rob Crittenden wrote:
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 03:20:38PM +0200, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
>> With today's OpenQA tests I can point out that using zram on 2048MB RAM
>> VMs
On Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 6:21 AM Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
>
> With today's OpenQA tests I can point out that using zram on 2048MB RAM
> VMs actually breaks FreeIPA deployment:
>
> https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/763006#step/role_deploy_domain_controller/35
>
> OpenQA uses 2048MB RAM for QEMU
On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 11:04:34AM -0500, Rob Crittenden wrote:
> Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 03:20:38PM +0200, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> >> With today's OpenQA tests I can point out that using zram on 2048MB RAM
> >> VMs actually breaks FreeIPA deployment:
> >>
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 03:20:38PM +0200, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
>> With today's OpenQA tests I can point out that using zram on 2048MB RAM
>> VMs actually breaks FreeIPA deployment:
>>
On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 03:20:38PM +0200, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> With today's OpenQA tests I can point out that using zram on 2048MB RAM
> VMs actually breaks FreeIPA deployment:
> https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/763006#step/role_deploy_domain_controller/35
>
> OpenQA uses 2048MB RAM
On la, 23 tammi 2021, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 4:29 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
Hi,
the proposal for Fedora 34 is to use zram-size == 1.0 * ram.
(Which I think is OK for the reasons listed in the Change page [0].)
But the original motivation for this change was
On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 4:39 PM Matthew Miller wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 03:11:32PM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> > - low memory (4G or less, somewhat subjective)
>
> From what I can see in my informal survey, a lot of 8GB users are benefiting
> too, with 1-2GB in the zram swap being
On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 03:11:32PM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> - low memory (4G or less, somewhat subjective)
From what I can see in my informal survey, a lot of 8GB users are benefiting
too, with 1-2GB in the zram swap being common, often with that compressing
very well.
--
Matthew Miller
On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 4:29 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> the proposal for Fedora 34 is to use zram-size == 1.0 * ram.
> (Which I think is OK for the reasons listed in the Change page [0].)
> But the original motivation for this change was boosting the size on
> machines with
On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 11:28:00AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> Now I'm a bit torn: the code is nice enough, but it seems to be a solution
> in search of a problem. So I thought I'd try a little crowd-sourcing:
> Would we have a real use for something like this?
I like the syntax.
Hi,
the proposal for Fedora 34 is to use zram-size == 1.0 * ram.
(Which I think is OK for the reasons listed in the Change page [0].)
But the original motivation for this change was boosting the size on
machines with little ram [1]. I wrote an exploratory patch [2] to specify
the size as a
24 matches
Mail list logo
