Hi On 7 January 2011 00:45, Daniel Kalchev <dan...@digsys.bg> wrote: > For pure storage, that is a place you send/store files, you don't really > need the ZIL. You also need the L2ARC only if you read over and over again > the same dataset, which is larger than the available ARC (ZFS cache memory). > Both will not be significant for 'backup server' application, because it's > very unlikely to do lots of SYNC I/O (where separate ZIL helps), or serve > the same files back (where the L2ARC might help). > > You should also know that having large L2ARC requires that you also have > larger ARC, because there are data pointers in the ARC that point to the > L2ARC data. Someone will do good to the community to publish some reasonable > estimates of the memory needs, so that people do not end up with large but > unusable L2ARC setups. > > It seems that the upcoming v28 ZFS will help greatly with the ZIL in the > main pool..
yes, it made a *huge* difference for me.. It went from "way too slow to comprehend what's going on" to "still slow but I can live with it" and I found no significant difference between ZIL on the main pool and on a separate SSD _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
