A little drunk, so i disagree! Since the pool is used for VM's A N D datastorage you will have double or maybe trippled readtimes. The virtual os/ storage will/read write and after that the pool and thus the core (OI) will write/read bits AND parity.
But again... A little drunk Kind regards, The out-side Op 6 okt. 2012 om 22:55 heeft "Dan Swartzendruber" <dswa...@druber.com> het volgende geschreven: > LOL, good point Bob :) > > -----Original Message----- > From: Bob Friesenhahn [mailto:bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us] > Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2012 4:46 PM > To: Discussion list for OpenIndiana > Subject: Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Raid type selection for large # of ssds > > On Fri, 5 Oct 2012, Dan Swartzendruber wrote: >> a 24-drive raidz2 is a really bad idea. you will get one drive IOPs. >> you > > Everyone who has commented thus far seems to have missed that this fellow is > only using SSDs for his pool (no rotating rust) so drive seek time is not an > issue. It is still true that running more SSDs in parallel should improve > available IOPS though. > > Bob > -- > Bob Friesenhahn > bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ > GraphicsMagick Maintainer, http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ > > _______________________________________________ > OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list > OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org > http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list > OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org > http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss _______________________________________________ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
