On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 21:09 +0200, Louwtjie Burger wrote:
> > > LUN are configured as RAID5 accross 15 disks.
>
> Won't such a large amount of spindles have a negative impact on
> performance (in a single RAID-5 setup) ... single I/O from system
> generates lots of backend I/O's ?
yes, single io
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 16:27 +0200, cesare VoltZ wrote:
> Hy,
>
> I'm planning to test on pre-production data center a ZFS solution for
> our application and I'm searching a good filesystem benchmark for see
> which configuration is the best solution.
>
> Server are Solaris 10 connected to a EMC C
On Fri, 2007-04-27 at 11:01 +0200, Roch - PAE wrote:
> Chad Mynhier writes:
> > On 4/27/07, Erblichs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Ming Zhang wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi All
> > > >
> > > > I wonder if any one ha
On Fri, 2007-04-27 at 07:53 +1000, James C. McPherson wrote:
> Ming Zhang wrote:
> > On Fri, 2007-04-27 at 09:25 +1200, Ian Collins wrote:
> >> Claus Guttesen wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi.
> >>>
> >>> If I create a zpool with the following co
On Thu, 2007-04-26 at 14:50 -0700, Eric Schrock wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 05:46:36PM -0400, Ming Zhang wrote:
> >
> > one thing i would guess is that the device id will keep the same and be
> > used as final proof while path name is only used as a clue.
>
On Fri, 2007-04-27 at 09:25 +1200, Ian Collins wrote:
> Claus Guttesen wrote:
>
> > Hi.
> >
> > If I create a zpool with the following command:
> >
> > zpool create tank raidz2 da0 da1 da2 da3 da4 da5 da6 da7
> >
> > and after a reboot the device names for some reason are changed so da2
> > and da
Hi All
I wonder if any one have idea about the performance loss caused by COW
in ZFS? If you have to read old data out before write it to some other
place, it involve disk seek.
Thanks
Ming
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
htt
