Re: [zfs-discuss] VDI iops with caching

2013-01-03 Thread Geoff Nordli
Thanks Richard, Happy New Year. On 13-01-03 09:45 AM, Richard Elling wrote: On Jan 2, 2013, at 8:45 PM, Geoff Nordli > wrote: I am looking at the performance numbers for the Oracle VDI admin guide. http://docs.oracle.com/html/E26214_02/performance-storage.html From my

Re: [zfs-discuss] poor CIFS and NFS performance

2013-01-03 Thread Cindy Swearingen
Free advice is cheap... I personally don't see the advantage of caching reads and logging writes to the same devices. (Is this recommended?) If this pool is serving CIFS/NFS, I would recommend testing for best performance with a mirrored log device first without a separate cache device: # zpool

Re: [zfs-discuss] poor CIFS and NFS performance

2013-01-03 Thread Eugen Leitl
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 03:44:54PM -0600, Phillip Wagstrom wrote: > > On Jan 3, 2013, at 3:33 PM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 03:21:33PM -0600, Phillip Wagstrom wrote: > >> Eugen, > >> > >>Be aware that p0 corresponds to the entire disk, regardless of how it > >> is par

Re: [zfs-discuss] poor CIFS and NFS performance

2013-01-03 Thread Phillip Wagstrom
On Jan 3, 2013, at 3:33 PM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 03:21:33PM -0600, Phillip Wagstrom wrote: >> Eugen, >> >> Be aware that p0 corresponds to the entire disk, regardless of how it >> is partitioned with fdisk. The fdisk partitions are 1 - 4. By using p0 for >> log a

Re: [zfs-discuss] poor CIFS and NFS performance

2013-01-03 Thread Eugen Leitl
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 03:21:33PM -0600, Phillip Wagstrom wrote: > Eugen, > > Be aware that p0 corresponds to the entire disk, regardless of how it > is partitioned with fdisk. The fdisk partitions are 1 - 4. By using p0 for > log and p1 for cache, you could very well be writing to same

Re: [zfs-discuss] poor CIFS and NFS performance

2013-01-03 Thread Phillip Wagstrom
Eugen, Be aware that p0 corresponds to the entire disk, regardless of how it is partitioned with fdisk. The fdisk partitions are 1 - 4. By using p0 for log and p1 for cache, you could very well be writing to same location on the SSD and corrupting things. Personally, I'd recom

Re: [zfs-discuss] poor CIFS and NFS performance

2013-01-03 Thread Eugen Leitl
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 12:44:26PM -0800, Richard Elling wrote: > > On Jan 3, 2013, at 12:33 PM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > > > On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 06:02:40PM +0100, Eugen Leitl wrote: > >> > >> Happy $holidays, > >> > >> I have a pool of 8x ST31000340AS on an LSI 8-port adapter as > > > > Just

Re: [zfs-discuss] poor CIFS and NFS performance

2013-01-03 Thread Richard Elling
On Jan 3, 2013, at 12:33 PM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 06:02:40PM +0100, Eugen Leitl wrote: >> >> Happy $holidays, >> >> I have a pool of 8x ST31000340AS on an LSI 8-port adapter as > > Just a little update on the home NAS project. > > I've set the pool sync to disabled, a

Re: [zfs-discuss] poor CIFS and NFS performance

2013-01-03 Thread Eugen Leitl
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 06:02:40PM +0100, Eugen Leitl wrote: > > Happy $holidays, > > I have a pool of 8x ST31000340AS on an LSI 8-port adapter as Just a little update on the home NAS project. I've set the pool sync to disabled, and added a couple of 8. c4t1d0 /pci@0,0/pci146

Re: [zfs-discuss] VDI iops with caching

2013-01-03 Thread Richard Elling
On Jan 2, 2013, at 8:45 PM, Geoff Nordli wrote: > I am looking at the performance numbers for the Oracle VDI admin guide. > > http://docs.oracle.com/html/E26214_02/performance-storage.html > > From my calculations for 200 desktops running Windows 7 knowledge user (15 > iops) with a 30-70 read/