I get defensive because every one of these threads ends one of three ways:
1. Something is broken with the hardware
2. Someone thinks they can tweak the system to make it even faster(even though they have sufficient hardware and good performance) and they kill their server performance because you can't do some bland tweaks and get more performance for free. If it worked for most people, it would be the default. I know, shocker, but its true.
3. Someone really thinks that "their" system will actually use a tweak and eek out extra performance. Everyone that falls into this group always ends up with the same answer... /sigh. Nonetheless we get these threads every 2-3 days anyway.
I got nothing in terms of tweaks. Based on other people with less than 4GB of RAM, the system may become unstable at any time, or maybe never. If it becomes unstable your data may be at risk. It's not an issue that can be fixed with some tweaks. You are literally below the minimum hardware requirements. Windows 2000 was smart in that it give you a big fat warning (in XP it wouldn't even let you install it with <128MB of RAM!) and I'm not sure about Vista/7/8 since I'd never consider using any of those with less than far more than the recommended(not the minimum). It really disappoints me that you even admit to reading my guide but still ignored all 3 warnings that lots of RAM is necessary for ZFS. I created the guide to help people NOT screw up the stuff that turns into a new thread every other day. Yet people ignore my guide, the guys that read the manuals, and then have a shocked look on their face when it doesn't work out. Surprise, the guys that invented the OS know exactly what you need. They aren't out to keep the hardware manufacturers in business. I created the guide to save people time and money(my time as well as your time and money) but it fails so often it is a disappointment. There's a reason why I don't bother posting my other presentations... too many people ignore them.
Your only real option is to switch to UFS, which may or may not help enough(that CPU is mega old) or buy hardware. Even a used first gen i3 system with 8GB of RAM would be a major major step up. The i3 system I manage for a friend can saturate 2x1-Gb LAN ports simultaneously. If money is an issue I'd look for an old i3 desktop someone doesn't want, upgrade it to 8GB (or 16GB) for cheap and enjoy your new ultra fast server. I have zero experience with AMD CPUs, so I can't recommend an AMD equivalent, but I'd think any AMD CPU with 4 cores that supports at least 16GB of RAM will be fine. Higher Mhz is better for CIFS.
I'm really not sure why people keep thinking that hardware that is literally a decade old(wikipedia lists the release date for that CPU as 2003!) can do anything useful with current OSes is a little crazy. I'd be scared to even run XP SP3 on it because of all of the overhead from adding SP3.
Also, I'm not sure why you necro'd a thread that is a year old...
1. Something is broken with the hardware
2. Someone thinks they can tweak the system to make it even faster(even though they have sufficient hardware and good performance) and they kill their server performance because you can't do some bland tweaks and get more performance for free. If it worked for most people, it would be the default. I know, shocker, but its true.
3. Someone really thinks that "their" system will actually use a tweak and eek out extra performance. Everyone that falls into this group always ends up with the same answer... /sigh. Nonetheless we get these threads every 2-3 days anyway.
I got nothing in terms of tweaks. Based on other people with less than 4GB of RAM, the system may become unstable at any time, or maybe never. If it becomes unstable your data may be at risk. It's not an issue that can be fixed with some tweaks. You are literally below the minimum hardware requirements. Windows 2000 was smart in that it give you a big fat warning (in XP it wouldn't even let you install it with <128MB of RAM!) and I'm not sure about Vista/7/8 since I'd never consider using any of those with less than far more than the recommended(not the minimum). It really disappoints me that you even admit to reading my guide but still ignored all 3 warnings that lots of RAM is necessary for ZFS. I created the guide to help people NOT screw up the stuff that turns into a new thread every other day. Yet people ignore my guide, the guys that read the manuals, and then have a shocked look on their face when it doesn't work out. Surprise, the guys that invented the OS know exactly what you need. They aren't out to keep the hardware manufacturers in business. I created the guide to save people time and money(my time as well as your time and money) but it fails so often it is a disappointment. There's a reason why I don't bother posting my other presentations... too many people ignore them.
Your only real option is to switch to UFS, which may or may not help enough(that CPU is mega old) or buy hardware. Even a used first gen i3 system with 8GB of RAM would be a major major step up. The i3 system I manage for a friend can saturate 2x1-Gb LAN ports simultaneously. If money is an issue I'd look for an old i3 desktop someone doesn't want, upgrade it to 8GB (or 16GB) for cheap and enjoy your new ultra fast server. I have zero experience with AMD CPUs, so I can't recommend an AMD equivalent, but I'd think any AMD CPU with 4 cores that supports at least 16GB of RAM will be fine. Higher Mhz is better for CIFS.
I'm really not sure why people keep thinking that hardware that is literally a decade old(wikipedia lists the release date for that CPU as 2003!) can do anything useful with current OSes is a little crazy. I'd be scared to even run XP SP3 on it because of all of the overhead from adding SP3.
Also, I'm not sure why you necro'd a thread that is a year old...