Default ZFS config, right now the system is using about 900MB including bloatmox UI.
I don't really see much memory usage, but I am also not doing a lot of I/O operations.
I would give it a try if you got 32GB systems or higher, but I won't do it on 16GB systems.
Since on 16GB you already giving 1GB away for the system and bloatmox and another potential 1GB per TB storage for ZFS.
I don't have exact figures, just starting using ZFS and its amazing.
means ZFS is gonna eat up to 50% of the available memory for ARC. it does not neccessarily release that easily, so even if memory consumption for now is low, it will raise to 16GB over time no matter what. if you can afford it, that's a good thing, if you might need it otherwise you need to be careful to not lose the speed benefit afterwards because the system starts to swap a lot.
@ehab said: @Falzo I didn't search but can you please tell why you like ZFS for proxmox?
I do not. or at least I make that decision carefully depending on how many VMs with how much RAM should go on there. as just said ZFS potentially consumes lots of RAM for its ARC unless you restrict it. also the system can not claim ARC back like it would do with regular filecache because it is controlled by ZFS and the kernel only sees blocked memory.
so it can be dangerous if you think you can commit 32GB to your VMs but ZFS is gonna eat half of that.
with that said, obviously one still can benefit from ZFS if calculated/balanced properly as the caching works pretty well. as an example I have a SYS dedi with 4x2TB where I do not need the full 32GB for the VMs because it's rather a backup box.
apart from the backup VM I only have a win rdp with 10GB RAM on it and another 10GB for different gameservers... limit zfs to 8GB and still have breathing room for the main system...
on the other hand if you plan to have more VMs on a box and eventually even overcommit on memory slightly to take advantage of KSM and stuff, I probably would not use ZFS - and most likely no HDD anymore anyway.
I was actually expecting that ZFS would release memory if its getting thin.
But thanks for the reminder to set a cap at xGB and override the default one.
@Neoon said:
I was actually expecting that ZFS would release memory if its getting thin.
But thanks for the reminder to set a cap at xGB and override the default one.
theoretically would there be performance loss with capping ram?
@Neoon said:
I was actually expecting that ZFS would release memory if its getting thin.
But thanks for the reminder to set a cap at xGB and override the default one.
theoretically would there be performance loss with capping ram?
I'd say that heavily depends on your real world workload.
the more RAM you can use for ARC the better simply because you can hold more data in there. however if you move a 4GB file one time and do not touch it directly afterwards it might simply clog you cache for nothing. you want your cache be hot and re-used frequently. most likely you can achieve that with a smaller one already 🤷♂️
for most regular use cases I think on a 32GB machine you do not need 16GB and if ARC is restricted to 8 or even 4GB you won't see or feel much of a difference performance wise after all.
@Neoon said: The 50% is a LIE, that used 90% of the hole system memory.
it shouldn't though, did you check the cache stats before changing the max limit? of course regular filecache will come on top, so might have looked different... but yeah, as said before. needs to be handled with a bit of care ;-)
@Neoon said: The 50% is a LIE, that used 90% of the hole system memory.
it shouldn't though, did you check the cache stats before changing the max limit? of course regular filecache will come on top, so might have looked different... but yeah, as said before. needs to be handled with a bit of care ;-)
The System was hitting 90%+, KSM did already engage.
So without setting a hard limit to ZFS I guess with any I/O intensive application you may get banged anytime.
RawSRV.com, $9.50/month dedicated core VPS in Miami
Main selling point is the 10 Gbps (shared) Unmetered and Path.net DDoS Protection
Main use is probably for GRE tunnels and such, but I'm using it to send data to Dropbox from multiple servers.
This is the lowest score of Ryzen 3900x I have ever seen
⭕ A simple uptime dashboard using UptimeRobot API https://upy.duo.ovh
⭕ Currently using VPS from BuyVM, GreenCloudVPS, Gullo's, Hetzner, HostHatch, InceptionHosting, LetBox, MaxKVM, MrVM, VirMach.
This plan comes with Limited Support and our brand new Cloud Portal access with self OS Rebuild, Start, Stop, Restart, TUN/TAP, Console, etc. management options.
hey @Mason , sorry for bothering you here at that time - no need to respond ;-)
just wanted to let you know that it seems GB changed something to the output or so. the numbers won't get displayed in yabs anymore (obviously they are there, because the link works just fine...
as said, no need to rush anything, a Merry Christmas to you and your family!
@Falzo said:
hey @Mason , sorry for bothering you here at that time - no need to respond ;-)
just wanted to let you know that it seems GB changed something to the output or so. the numbers won't get displayed in yabs anymore (obviously they are there, because the link works just fine...
as said, no need to rush anything, a Merry Christmas to you and your family!
nonononono this cant be happening no scores what? no
@Falzo said:
hey @Mason , sorry for bothering you here at that time - no need to respond ;-)
just wanted to let you know that it seems GB changed something to the output or so. the numbers won't get displayed in yabs anymore (obviously they are there, because the link works just fine...
as said, no need to rush anything, a Merry Christmas to you and your family!
nonononono this cant be happening no scores what? no
no
nooooooooooooooo
stay strong mate! you will live through it. it's gonna be though, but you can do it!
@Falzo said:
hey @Mason , sorry for bothering you here at that time - no need to respond ;-)
just wanted to let you know that it seems GB changed something to the output or so. the numbers won't get displayed in yabs anymore (obviously they are there, because the link works just fine...
as said, no need to rush anything, a Merry Christmas to you and your family!
Perhaps whatever it was got fixed? Just ran a GB4 and GB5 test and the numbers populated just fine, let me know if you're still having the issue. If you still are having issues, then the only thing that I can possibly think of would be that your host isn't able to connect to the geekbench url (browser.geekbench.com) to retrieve the results after the tests are done.
@Mason said: If you still are having issues, then the only thing that I can possibly think of would be that your host isn't able to connect to the geekbench url (browser.geekbench.com) to retrieve the results after the tests are done.
thanks a lot for checking and pointing into the right direction:
as this is a very old host, it's possible that just my ca-certificates needs and update... I'll investigate ;-)
sorry for the possible false alarm.
edit: just to mention, I only wrote here, because I saw another yabs missing those number over on OGF - hence I probably jumped to a conclusion to quickly. again sorry for waking you up ;-)
edit 2: indeed they (GB) are using LE and my old vps still had their old rootcs in store. combined with a bug in a somewhat older openssl version this seem to break validation. removing the single old DST root from ca-certificate brought me numbers back:
@giang said:
LowHosting Final Bench before I let it expire.
Not enjoying it? I think it's one of the best value with 50% off
It seems pretty solid. What is the monthly/yearly price?
⭕ A simple uptime dashboard using UptimeRobot API https://upy.duo.ovh
⭕ Currently using VPS from BuyVM, GreenCloudVPS, Gullo's, Hetzner, HostHatch, InceptionHosting, LetBox, MaxKVM, MrVM, VirMach.
⭕ A simple uptime dashboard using UptimeRobot API https://upy.duo.ovh
⭕ Currently using VPS from BuyVM, GreenCloudVPS, Gullo's, Hetzner, HostHatch, InceptionHosting, LetBox, MaxKVM, MrVM, VirMach.
Nexus says my VPS is getting migrated (DE>>NL) so dropping a before here & after to follow a bit later.
Big gotcha though - not representative of migration overall. It's a grandfathered once off clearance special with nine lives and a lot of luck that @seriesn very honourably rolled 1:1 specs wise last migration when really the platforms were not 1:1 comparable at all. So regardless of before/after results I won't be complaining
Comments
Yabs again on Gravelands KS-LE but on ZFS Raid 1, 1TB
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
KS-LE in ROUBAAAIX with ZFS Raid 1
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
wow thats good IO for HDD
how much ram is it needed to set aside for this?
I bench YABS 24/7/365 unless it's a leap year.
Default ZFS config, right now the system is using about 900MB including bloatmox UI.
I don't really see much memory usage, but I am also not doing a lot of I/O operations.
I would give it a try if you got 32GB systems or higher, but I won't do it on 16GB systems.
Since on 16GB you already giving 1GB away for the system and bloatmox and another potential 1GB per TB storage for ZFS.
I don't have exact figures, just starting using ZFS and its amazing.
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
and
means ZFS is gonna eat up to 50% of the available memory for ARC. it does not neccessarily release that easily, so even if memory consumption for now is low, it will raise to 16GB over time no matter what. if you can afford it, that's a good thing, if you might need it otherwise you need to be careful to not lose the speed benefit afterwards because the system starts to swap a lot.
@Falzo I didn't search but can you please tell why you like ZFS for proxmox?
I do not. or at least I make that decision carefully depending on how many VMs with how much RAM should go on there. as just said ZFS potentially consumes lots of RAM for its ARC unless you restrict it. also the system can not claim ARC back like it would do with regular filecache because it is controlled by ZFS and the kernel only sees blocked memory.
so it can be dangerous if you think you can commit 32GB to your VMs but ZFS is gonna eat half of that.
with that said, obviously one still can benefit from ZFS if calculated/balanced properly as the caching works pretty well. as an example I have a SYS dedi with 4x2TB where I do not need the full 32GB for the VMs because it's rather a backup box.
apart from the backup VM I only have a win rdp with 10GB RAM on it and another 10GB for different gameservers... limit zfs to 8GB and still have breathing room for the main system...
on the other hand if you plan to have more VMs on a box and eventually even overcommit on memory slightly to take advantage of KSM and stuff, I probably would not use ZFS - and most likely no HDD anymore anyway.
I was actually expecting that ZFS would release memory if its getting thin.
But thanks for the reminder to set a cap at xGB and override the default one.
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
told you so ;-)
theoretically would there be performance loss with capping ram?
I bench YABS 24/7/365 unless it's a leap year.
I'd say that heavily depends on your real world workload.
the more RAM you can use for ARC the better simply because you can hold more data in there. however if you move a 4GB file one time and do not touch it directly afterwards it might simply clog you cache for nothing. you want your cache be hot and re-used frequently. most likely you can achieve that with a smaller one already 🤷♂️
for most regular use cases I think on a 32GB machine you do not need 16GB and if ARC is restricted to 8 or even 4GB you won't see or feel much of a difference performance wise after all.
The 50% is a LIE, that used 90% of the hole system memory.
Applied this now on the machines and reboot, will see if that's enough.
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
it shouldn't though, did you check the cache stats before changing the max limit? of course regular filecache will come on top, so might have looked different... but yeah, as said before. needs to be handled with a bit of care ;-)
The System was hitting 90%+, KSM did already engage.
So without setting a hard limit to ZFS I guess with any I/O intensive application you may get banged anytime.
3-4GB should be fine tho, I hope.
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
RawSRV.com, $9.50/month dedicated core VPS in Miami
Main selling point is the 10 Gbps (shared) Unmetered and Path.net DDoS Protection
Main use is probably for GRE tunnels and such, but I'm using it to send data to Dropbox from multiple servers.
I am a representative of Advin Servers
Hosthatch HK revisit
biennial deal
very slight steal observed but going strong after few months. lovely I/O
iperf3 Network Speed Tests (IPv4): --------------------------------- Provider | Location (Link) | Send Speed | Recv Speed | | | Clouvider | London, UK (10G) | 322 Mbits/sec | 290 Mbits/sec Online.net | Paris, FR (10G) | 454 Mbits/sec | 390 Mbits/sec WorldStream | The Netherlands (10G) | 422 Mbits/sec | 216 Mbits/sec WebHorizon | Singapore (1G) | busy | busy Clouvider | NYC, NY, US (10G) | 418 Mbits/sec | 319 Mbits/sec Velocity Online | Tallahassee, FL, US (10G) | 405 Mbits/sec | 354 Mbits/sec Clouvider | Los Angeles, CA, US (10G) | 441 Mbits/sec | 369 Mbits/sec Iveloz Telecom | Sao Paulo, BR (2G) | 306 Mbits/sec | 138 Mbits/sec iperf3 Network Speed Tests (IPv6): --------------------------------- Provider | Location (Link) | Send Speed | Recv Speed | | | Clouvider | London, UK (10G) | 580 Mbits/sec | 338 Mbits/sec Online.net | Paris, FR (10G) | 615 Mbits/sec | 333 Mbits/sec WorldStream | The Netherlands (10G) | 576 Mbits/sec | 133 Mbits/sec WebHorizon | Singapore (1G) | 433 Mbits/sec | 588 Mbits/sec Clouvider | NYC, NY, US (10G) | 530 Mbits/sec | 385 Mbits/sec Clouvider | Los Angeles, CA, US (10G) | 514 Mbits/sec | 376 Mbits/secI bench YABS 24/7/365 unless it's a leap year.
Stratagem Tritium - limited to 200mbps. I believe plans higher than this are on 1g
Racknerd. Today I observed high steal, so I decided to run YABS:
This is the lowest score of Ryzen 3900x I have ever seen
⭕ A simple uptime dashboard using UptimeRobot API https://upy.duo.ovh
⭕ Currently using VPS from BuyVM, GreenCloudVPS, Gullo's, Hetzner, HostHatch, InceptionHosting, LetBox, MaxKVM, MrVM, VirMach.
if you contact support they will move you
but since they have no stock it is likely that all nodes are pretty full
Raspberry Pi4 - 4 GB with M.2 SATA Boot
Manjaro 21. Delighted to see ARM support (experimental as the note says!)
Wednesday 15 December 2021 10:00:10 PM IST ARM compatibility is considered *experimental* Basic System Information: --------------------------------- Processor : Cortex-A72 CPU cores : 4 @ 1500.0000 MHz AES-NI : ❌ Disabled VM-x/AMD-V : ❌ Disabled RAM : 3.7 GiB Swap : 5.5 GiB Disk : 234.7 GiB fio Disk Speed Tests (Mixed R/W 50/50): --------------------------------- Block Size | 4k (IOPS) | 64k (IOPS) ------ | --- ---- | ---- ---- Read | 51.50 MB/s (12.8k) | 145.19 MB/s (2.2k) Write | 51.47 MB/s (12.8k) | 149.51 MB/s (2.3k) Total | 102.98 MB/s (25.7k) | 294.70 MB/s (4.6k) | | Block Size | 512k (IOPS) | 1m (IOPS) ------ | --- ---- | ---- ---- Read | 162.08 MB/s (316) | 155.07 MB/s (151) Write | 175.94 MB/s (343) | 173.01 MB/s (168) Total | 338.03 MB/s (659) | 328.08 MB/s (319) ARM architecture not supported by Geekbench 4, use Geekbench 5. Geekbench 4 test failed. Run manually to determine cause. Geekbench 5 Benchmark Test: --------------------------------- Test | Value | Single Core | 216 Multi Core | 550 Full Test | https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/11626169blog archives
Probably they are pretty full.
I'd like to wait a few day to see whether it becomes better.
i think it's fine given that its dedicated I/O, perhaps set swappiness to 1?
I bench YABS 24/7/365 unless it's a leap year.
I doubt it will improve much with time
If you ask support they are usually quick and fairly helpful, much better than average for a LE host, maybe they can still help
Hostcram
Confidential: Ryzen Two (LXC)
2 vCPU Core (Ryzen 9 5950X)
2 GB DDR4 RAM (Samsung)
20 GB NVMe SSD Storage (Samsung)
2 TB Bandwidth @ 1 Gbps Port
1 Dedicated IPv4 (IPv6 on request)
This plan comes with Limited Support and our brand new Cloud Portal access with self OS Rebuild, Start, Stop, Restart, TUN/TAP, Console, etc. management options.
1 Year @ $25.00 USD
2 Year @ $40.00 USD
I bench YABS 24/7/365 unless it's a leap year.
Just grabbed another Hetzner box!
SYS-2-SAT-32 FRANCE :
stardust NL:
Greencloudvps
Ryzen10GbpsHK-3
NVMe 4.0
look at that network, can't believe it's in Asia
I bench YABS 24/7/365 unless it's a leap year.
hosthatch HK revisit
I bench YABS 24/7/365 unless it's a leap year.
Crazy IOPS. Assuming Raid0? I have less than 10K hours disk but my IO is
io Disk Speed Tests (Mixed R/W 50/50):
Team push-ups!
Yep Raid0 - IOPS settled a bit now
Any benchmark for the OVH Advance-LE ?
It is currently on sale
https://webhorizon.net
My new VM in Amsterdam.
Amadex • Hosting Forums • root.hr
hey @Mason , sorry for bothering you here at that time - no need to respond ;-)
just wanted to let you know that it seems GB changed something to the output or so. the numbers won't get displayed in yabs anymore (obviously they are there, because the link works just fine...
as said, no need to rush anything, a Merry Christmas to you and your family!
nonononono this cant be happening no scores what? no
no
nooooooooooooooo
I bench YABS 24/7/365 unless it's a leap year.
stay strong mate! you will live through it. it's gonna be though, but you can do it!
Perhaps whatever it was got fixed? Just ran a GB4 and GB5 test and the numbers populated just fine, let me know if you're still having the issue. If you still are having issues, then the only thing that I can possibly think of would be that your host isn't able to connect to the geekbench url (browser.geekbench.com) to retrieve the results after the tests are done.
yabs daddy
thanks a lot for checking and pointing into the right direction:
as this is a very old host, it's possible that just my ca-certificates needs and update... I'll investigate ;-)
sorry for the possible false alarm.
edit: just to mention, I only wrote here, because I saw another yabs missing those number over on OGF - hence I probably jumped to a conclusion to quickly. again sorry for waking you up ;-)
edit 2: indeed they (GB) are using LE and my old vps still had their old rootcs in store. combined with a bug in a somewhat older openssl version this seem to break validation. removing the single old DST root from ca-certificate brought me numbers back:
On my Laptop - 2018 (or 2017) Huawei - WSL:
Its a 1TB Samsung 860 - Beats me why it shows 250GiB...
boomer.host final bench
I bench YABS 24/7/365 unless it's a leap year.
LowHosting Final Bench before I let it expire.
Not enjoying it? I think it's one of the best value with 50% off
Team push-ups!
It seems pretty solid. What is the monthly/yearly price?
⭕ A simple uptime dashboard using UptimeRobot API https://upy.duo.ovh
⭕ Currently using VPS from BuyVM, GreenCloudVPS, Gullo's, Hetzner, HostHatch, InceptionHosting, LetBox, MaxKVM, MrVM, VirMach.
Periodic YABS for InceptionHosting Storage (PHX). Pretty solid for almost one year uptime.
⭕ A simple uptime dashboard using UptimeRobot API https://upy.duo.ovh
⭕ Currently using VPS from BuyVM, GreenCloudVPS, Gullo's, Hetzner, HostHatch, InceptionHosting, LetBox, MaxKVM, MrVM, VirMach.
€12 a month with the deal. Unlimited bandwidth!
Team push-ups!
still in use https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/11848688 √
This is the free dedi MetalVPS got for BF from Shock Hosting. Newly reinstalled with Debian 11. RAID 1. Please note that, since we got it for free, we are not charging for accounts on it. Thanks @ShockHosting!
Nexus says my VPS is getting migrated (DE>>NL) so dropping a before here & after to follow a bit later.
Big gotcha though - not representative of migration overall. It's a grandfathered once off clearance special with nine lives and a lot of luck that @seriesn very honourably rolled 1:1 specs wise last migration when really the platforms were not 1:1 comparable at all. So regardless of before/after results I won't be complaining