Re: zfs pool behavior - is it ever freed?

[Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost>]

David Brownlee <abs%absd.org@localhost> writes:

> I would definitely like to see something like this in-tree soonest for
> low memory (<6GB?) machines, but I'd prefer not to affect machines
> with large amounts of memory used as dedicated ZFS fileservers (at
> least not until its easily tunable)

Can you apply this locally and spiff it up so that for say >= 8GB or >=
16GB the new rule doesn't fire?  That seems the fastest path to fixing
that is clearly very broken.  (IMHO avoiding pathological behavior is
more important than what is likely a minor efficiency issue, but it's
easier to avoid that discussion.)

(We don't have any data on the table that says this would hurt, either,
assuming that anyone using zfs is either using ssd only or has l2arc on
ssd.  Actual data would be interesting!)