> From: Edward Ned Harvey
> [mailto:opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensola...@nedharvey.com]
>
> In order to test random reads, you have to configure iozone to use a data set
> which is much larger than physical ram. Since iozone will write a big file
> and
> then immediately afterward, start reading
On Dec 7, 2010, at 9:49 PM, Edward Ned Harvey
wrote:
>> From: Ross Walker [mailto:rswwal...@gmail.com]
>>
>> Well besides databases there are VM datastores, busy email servers, busy
>> ldap servers, busy web servers, and I'm sure the list goes on and on.
>>
>> I'm sure it is much harder to lis
> > I am totally aware of these differences, but it seems some people
> > think RAIDz is nonsense unless you don't need speed at all. My
> > testing shows (so far) that the speed is quite good, far better than
> > single drives. Also, as Eric said, those speeds are for random i/o.
> > I doubt there
> From: Ross Walker [mailto:rswwal...@gmail.com]
>
> Well besides databases there are VM datastores, busy email servers, busy
> ldap servers, busy web servers, and I'm sure the list goes on and on.
>
> I'm sure it is much harder to list servers that are truly sequential in IO
then
> random. This
> From: Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk [mailto:r...@karlsbakk.net]
>
> > Bear a few things in mind:
> >
> > iops is not iops.
>
>
> I am totally aware of these differences, but it seems some people think
> RAIDz is nonsense unless you don't need speed at all. My testing shows (so
> far) that the speed is
On Dec 7, 2010, at 12:46 PM, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote:
>> Bear a few things in mind:
>>
>> iops is not iops.
>
>
> I am totally aware of these differences, but it seems some people think RAIDz
> is nonsense unless you don't need speed at all. My testing shows (so far)
> that the speed is q
> Bear a few things in mind:
>
> iops is not iops.
I am totally aware of these differences, but it seems some people think RAIDz
is nonsense unless you don't need speed at all. My testing shows (so far) that
the speed is quite good, far better than single drives. Also, as Eric said,
those spe
> From: Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk [mailto:r...@karlsbakk.net]
>
> The numbers I've heard say the number of iops for a raidzn volume should
> be about the number of iops for the slowest drive in the set. While this might
> sound like a good base point, I tend to disagree. I've been doing some testing
>
