I have been testing the performance of zfs vs. ufs using filebench. The setup
is a v240, 4GB RAM, 2...@1503mhz, 1 320GB _SAN_ attached LUN, and using a ZFS
mirrored root disk. Our SAN is a top notch NVRAM based SAN. There are lots of
discussions using ZFS with SAN based storage.. and it seems ZFS is designed to
perform best with dumb disk (JBODs). The test I ran support this observation..
and no matter what kernel tunables I make the zfs_params, I just can't seem to
get the performance from ZFS that I can get out of UFS under the Solaris Volume
Manager (SVM). I am using the single LUN test because it performed better than
any striping configuration I came up with. We don't use any software RAID of
any kind.. because the SAN does it all for us. One interesting test revealed
better performance using the SMI label on our LUNs than that EFI label. This
is true for using the fileserver, large_db_oltp_8k_uncached, and
large_db_oltp_8k_cached workloads from filebench. The file
server differences were not that great, but he db workloads performed 4x
better using the SMI labeled LUNs as opposed to the EFI labeled LUNs. Does
anyone know why ZFS would perform better with the SMI labeled luns that the EFI
labeled luns? Is this the way it suppose to be? Thanks.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
_______________________________________________
perf-discuss mailing list
perf-discuss@opensolaris.org
