Re: [zfs-discuss] Scrub performance

> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- > boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Edward Ned Harvey > > I can tell you I've had terrible everything rates when I used dedup. So, the above comment isn't fair, really. The truth is here: http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zf

Re: [zfs-discuss] Scrub performance

On 2013-02-04 17:10, Karl Wagner wrote: OK then, I guess my next question would be what's the best way to "undedupe" the data I have? Would it work for me to zfs send/receive on the same pool (with dedup off), deleting the old datasets once they have been 'copied'? I think I remember reading som

Re: [zfs-discuss] Scrub performance

Hi, OK then, I guess my next question would be what's the best way to "undedupe" the data I have? Would it work for me to zfs send/receive on the same pool (with dedup off), deleting the old datasets once they have been 'copied'? yes. Worked for my. I think I remember reading somewhere that

Re: [zfs-discuss] Scrub performance

OK then, I guess my next question would be what's the best way to "undedupe" the data I have? Would it work for me to zfs send/receive on the same pool (with dedup off), deleting the old datasets once they have been 'copied'? I think I remember reading somewhere that the DDT never shrinks, so

Re: [zfs-discuss] Scrub performance

On 2013-02-04 15:52, Edward Ned Harvey (opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensolaris) wrote: I noticed that sometimes I had terrible rates with < 10MB/sec. Then later it rose up to < 70MB/sec. Are you talking about scrub rates for the complete scrub? Because if you sit there and watch it, from minute

Re: [zfs-discuss] Scrub performance

Hi Edward, From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Koopmann, Jan-Peter all I can tell you is that I've had terrible scrub rates when I used dedup. I can tell

Re: [zfs-discuss] Scrub performance

> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- > boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Koopmann, Jan-Peter > > all I can tell you is that I've had terrible scrub rates when I used dedup. I can tell you I've had terrible everything rates when I used dedup. > The > DDT was a bi

Re: [zfs-discuss] Scrub performance

Hi Karl, Recently, however, it has started taking over 20hours to complete. Not much has happened to it in that time: A few extra files added, maybe a couple of deletions, but not a huge amount. I am finding it difficult to understand why performance would have dropped so dramatically. FYI th

[zfs-discuss] Scrub performance

Hi all I have had a ZFS file server for a while now. I recently upgraded it, giving it 16GB RAM and an SSD for L2ARC. This allowed me to evaluate dedupe on certain datasets, which worked pretty well. The main reason for the upgrade was that something wasn't working quite right, and I was get

Re: [zfs-discuss] scrub performance

On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 06:25:21PM -0800, David Pacheco wrote: > Stuart Anderson wrote: > > > >It is also interesting to note that this system is now making negative > >progress. I can understand the remaining time estimate going up with > >time, but what does it mean for the % complete number to g

Re: [zfs-discuss] scrub performance

Stuart Anderson wrote: > On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 11:51:00AM -0800, Stuart Anderson wrote: > >> I currently have an X4500 running S10U4 with the latest ZFS uber patch >> (127729-07) for which "zpool scrub" is making very slow progress even >> though the necessary resources are apparently availabl

Re: [zfs-discuss] scrub performance

On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 05:55:53PM -0800, Marion Hakanson wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > > It is also interesting to note that this system is now making negative > > progress. I can understand the remaining time estimate going up with time, > > but what does it mean for the % complete number to

Re: [zfs-discuss] scrub performance

[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > It is also interesting to note that this system is now making negative > progress. I can understand the remaining time estimate going up with time, > but what does it mean for the % complete number to go down after 6 hours of > work? Sorry I don't have any helpful experi

Re: [zfs-discuss] scrub performance

On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 11:51:00AM -0800, Stuart Anderson wrote: > I currently have an X4500 running S10U4 with the latest ZFS uber patch > (127729-07) for which "zpool scrub" is making very slow progress even > though the necessary resources are apparently available. Currently it has It is also i

[zfs-discuss] scrub performance

I currently have an X4500 running S10U4 with the latest ZFS uber patch (127729-07) for which "zpool scrub" is making very slow progress even though the necessary resources are apparently available. Currently it has been running for 3 days to reach 75% completion, however, in the last 12 hours this