On Thu, Jun 2 at 20:49, Erik Trimble wrote:
Nope. In terms of actual, obtainable IOPS, a 7200RPM drive isn't
going to be able to do more than 200 under ideal conditions, and
should be able to manage 50 under anything other than the
pedantically worst-case situation. That's only about a 50% dev
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Paul Kraus wrote:
> So is there a way to read these real I/Ops numbers ?
>
> iostat is reporting 600-800 I/Ops peak (1 second sample) for these
> 7200 RPM SATA drives. If the drives are doing aggregation, then how to
> tell what is really going on ?
I've always as
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 11:49 PM, Erik Trimble wrote:
> On 6/2/2011 5:12 PM, Jens Elkner wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 06:17:08PM -0700, Erik Trimble wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, 2011-06-01 at 12:54 -0400, Paul Kraus wrote:
>>
>>> Here's how you calculate (average) how long a random IOPs takes:
>>
On 6/2/2011 5:12 PM, Jens Elkner wrote:
On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 06:17:08PM -0700, Erik Trimble wrote:
On Wed, 2011-06-01 at 12:54 -0400, Paul Kraus wrote:
Here's how you calculate (average) how long a random IOPs takes:
seek time + ((60 / RPMs) / 2))]
A truly sequential IOPs is:
(60 / RPMs)
On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 06:17:08PM -0700, Erik Trimble wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-06-01 at 12:54 -0400, Paul Kraus wrote:
> Here's how you calculate (average) how long a random IOPs takes:
> seek time + ((60 / RPMs) / 2))]
>
> A truly sequential IOPs is:
> (60 / RPMs) / 2)
>
> For that series of dr
> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
> boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Erik Trimble
>
> Here's how you calculate (average) how long a random IOPs takes:
>
> seek time + ((60 / RPMs) / 2))]
>
> 1 Random IOPs takes [8.5ms + 4.13ms] = 12.6ms, which translates to 78
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 9:17 PM, Erik Trimble wrote:
> Here's how you calculate (average) how long a random IOPs takes:
>
> seek time + ((60 / RPMs) / 2))]
>
> A truly sequential IOPs is:
>
> (60 / RPMs) / 2)
>
> For that series of drives, seek time averages 8.5ms (per Seagate).
>
> So, you get
>
On Wed, 2011-06-01 at 12:54 -0400, Paul Kraus wrote:
> I figure this group will know better than any other I have contact
> with, is 700-800 I/Ops reasonable for a 7200 RPM SATA drive (1 TB Sun
> badged Seagate ST31000N in a J4400) ? I have a resilver running and am
> seeing about 700-800 writes/se
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Tuomas Leikola wrote:
>> I have a resilver running and am
>> seeing about 700-800 writes/sec. on the hot spare as it resilvers.
>
> IIRC resilver works in block birth order (write order) which is
> commonly more-or-less sequential unless the fs is fragmented. So it
> I have a resilver running and am
> seeing about 700-800 writes/sec. on the hot spare as it resilvers.
IIRC resilver works in block birth order (write order) which is
commonly more-or-less sequential unless the fs is fragmented. So it
might or might not be. I think you cannot get that kind of per
On 01 June, 2011 - Paul Kraus sent me these 0,9K bytes:
> I figure this group will know better than any other I have contact
> with, is 700-800 I/Ops reasonable for a 7200 RPM SATA drive (1 TB Sun
> badged Seagate ST31000N in a J4400) ? I have a resilver running and am
> seeing about 700-800 w
I figure this group will know better than any other I have contact
with, is 700-800 I/Ops reasonable for a 7200 RPM SATA drive (1 TB Sun
badged Seagate ST31000N in a J4400) ? I have a resilver running and am
seeing about 700-800 writes/sec. on the hot spare as it resilvers.
There is no other I/
12 matches
Mail list logo
