On Jul 30, 2010, at 11:35 AM, Andrew Gabriel wrote:
> Just wondering if anyone has experimented with working out the best zvol
> recordsize for a zvol which is backing a zpool over iSCSI?
This is an interesting question. Today, most ZFS implementations are done
directly on devices with an effe
On Jul 31, 2010, at 8:56 PM, Gregory Gee wrote:
> I was thinking of adding an SDD ZIL to my pool, but then read this in the
> 'Best Practice Guide'.
>
> *
> Prior to pool version 19, if you have an unmirrored log device that fails,
> your whole pool is permanently lost.
> Prior to pool v
On Sun, 1 Aug 2010, Jim Doyle wrote:
You probably would not notice the performance effects of a SSD ZIL
on a home network ; so the price of the ticket may not be worth the
ride for you. OTOH,
There are cases where the SSD ZIL will offer tremendous improvement.
One of the common cases is when
On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 2:57 PM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
> What's a good choice for a decently stable upgrade? I'm unable to run
> backups because ZFS send/receive won't do full-pool replication reliably, it
> hangs better than 2/3 of the time, and people here have told me later
> versions (later
> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
> boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Gregory Gee
>
> Edward, disabling ZIL might be ok, but let me characterize what my home
> server does and tell me if disabling ZIL is ok.
You should understand what it all means, and make your
On Sun, Aug 01, 2010 at 12:36:28PM -0700, Gregory Gee wrote:
> Jim, that ACARD looks really nice, but out of the price range for a
> home server.
>
> Edward, disabling ZIL might be ok, but let me characterize what my
> home server does and tell me if disabling ZIL is ok.
>
> My home OpenSolaris s
Jim, that ACARD looks really nice, but out of the price range for a home server.
Edward, disabling ZIL might be ok, but let me characterize what my home server
does and tell me if disabling ZIL is ok.
My home OpenSolaris server is only used for storage. I have a separate linux
box that runs
What's a good choice for a decently stable upgrade? I'm unable to run
backups because ZFS send/receive won't do full-pool replication
reliably, it hangs better than 2/3 of the time, and people here have
told me later versions (later than 111b) fix this. I was originally
waiting for the "sprin
You probably would not notice the performance effects of a SSD ZIL on a home
network ; so the price of the ticket may not be worth the ride for you. OTOH,
you would notice a significant improvement by using that SSD as an L2ARC
device. Because the head latency on consumer 1TB drives is so long, t
On Sat, 31 Jul 2010, Gregory Gee wrote:
The maximum size of a log device should be approximately 1/2 the
size of physical memory because that is the maximum amount of
potential in-play data that can be stored. For example, if a system
has 16 Gbytes of physical memory, consider a maximum log de
> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
> boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Gregory Gee
>
> Prior to pool version 19, mirroring the log device is highly
> recommended.
>
> I have the following.
>
> This system is currently running ZFS pool version 14.
>
> This r
I can achive 140MBps to individual disks until I hit a 1GBps system ceiling
which I suspect 1GBps may be all that the 4x SAS HBA connection on a 3Gbps sas
expander can handle. (just a guess)
Anyway, with ZFS or SVM I can't do much beyond a single disk performance total
(if that) I am thinking
I wonder if this has anything to do with it:
http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=33739菋
Anyway, I've already blown away my OSOL install to test Linux performance - so
I can't test ZFS at the moment.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
__
Horace -
I've run more tests and come up with basically the exact same numbers you do.
On Opensolaris - I get about the same from my drives (140MBps) and hit a 1GBps
(almost exactly) top end system bottle neck when pushing data to all drives.
However, if I give ZFS more than one drive (mirror, s
14 matches
Mail list logo
