Stephen Green wrote:
I'll let you know
how it works out. Suggestions as to pre/post installation IO tests
welcome.
The installation went off without a hitch (modulo a bad few seconds
after reboot.) Story here:
http://blogs.sun.com/searchguy/entry/homebrew_hybrid_storage_pool
I've got one
Stephen Green wrote:
Also, I got my wife to agree to a new SSD, so I presume that I can
simply do the re-silver with the new drive when it arrives.
And the last thing for today, I ended up getting:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820609330
which is 16GB and should be suf
Stephen Green wrote:
Oh, and for those following along at home, the re-silvering of the slog
to a file is proceeding well. 72% done in 25 minutes.
And, for the purposes of the archives, the re-silver finished in 34
minutes and I successfully removed the RAM disk. Thanks, Erik for the
eminen
Scott Meilicke wrote:
Note - this has a mini PCIe interface, not PCIe.
Well, that's an *excellent* point. I guess that lets that one out.
It turns out I do have an open SATA port, so I might just go for a disk
that has a SATA interface, since that should just work.
I had the 64GB version
Note - this has a mini PCIe interface, not PCIe.
I had the 64GB version in a Dell Mini 9. While it was great for it's small
size, low power and low heat characteristics (no fan on the Mini 9!), it was
only faster than the striped sata drives in my mac pro when it came to random
reads. Everythin
Stephen Green wrote:
Thanks for the advice, I think it might be time to convince the wife
that I need to buy an SSD. Anyone have recommendations for a reasonably
priced SSD for a home box?
For example, does anyone know if something like:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16
erik.ableson wrote:
On 7 août 09, at 02:03, Stephen Green wrote:
Man, that looks so nice I think I'll change my mail client to do dates
in French :-)
Now my only question is: what do I do when it's done? If I reboot
and the ram disk disappears, will my tank be dead? Or will it just
conti
On 7 août 09, at 02:03, Stephen Green wrote:
I used a 2GB ram disk (the machine has 12GB of RAM) and this jumped
the backup up to somewhere between 18-40MB/s, which means that I'm
only a couple of hours away from finishing my backup. This is, as
far as I can tell, magic (since I started th
erik.ableson wrote:
You're running into the same problem I had with 2009.06 as they have
"corrected" a bug where the iSCSI target prior to
2009.06 didn't honor completely SCSI sync commands issued by the initiator.
I think I've hit the same thing. I'm using an iscsi volume as the target
for T
Joseph L. Casale wrote:
Quick snipped from zpool iostat :
mirror 1.12G 695G 0 0 0 0
c8t12d0 - - 0 0 0 0
c8t13d0 - - 0 0 0 0
c7t2d04K 29.0G 0 1.56K 0 200M
c7t3d04K 29
>Quick snipped from zpool iostat :
>
> mirror 1.12G 695G 0 0 0 0
> c8t12d0 - - 0 0 0 0
> c8t13d0 - - 0 0 0 0
> c7t2d04K 29.0G 0 1.56K 0 200M
> c7t3d04K 29.0G 0 1.
Ross Walker wrote:
On Aug 5, 2009, at 2:49 AM, Henrik Johansen wrote:
Ross Walker wrote:
On Aug 4, 2009, at 8:36 PM, Carson Gaspar wrote:
Ross Walker wrote:
I get pretty good NFS write speeds with NVRAM (40MB/s 4k
sequential write). It's a Dell PERC 6/e with 512MB onboard.
...
there,
Ross Walker wrote:
On Aug 5, 2009, at 3:09 AM, Henrik Johansen wrote:
Ross Walker wrote:
On Aug 4, 2009, at 10:22 PM, Bob Friesenhahn > wrote:
On Tue, 4 Aug 2009, Ross Walker wrote:
Are you sure that it is faster than an SSD? The data is indeed
pushed closer to the disks, but there may
On Aug 5, 2009, at 3:09 AM, Henrik Johansen wrote:
Ross Walker wrote:
On Aug 4, 2009, at 10:22 PM, Bob Friesenhahn > wrote:
On Tue, 4 Aug 2009, Ross Walker wrote:
Are you sure that it is faster than an SSD? The data is indeed
pushed closer to the disks, but there may be considerably mor
On Aug 5, 2009, at 2:49 AM, Henrik Johansen wrote:
Ross Walker wrote:
On Aug 4, 2009, at 8:36 PM, Carson Gaspar wrote:
Ross Walker wrote:
I get pretty good NFS write speeds with NVRAM (40MB/s 4k
sequential write). It's a Dell PERC 6/e with 512MB onboard.
...
there, dedicated slog devic
Ross Walker wrote:
On Aug 4, 2009, at 10:17 PM, James Lever wrote:
On 05/08/2009, at 11:41 AM, Ross Walker wrote:
What is your recipe for these?
There wasn't one! ;)
The drive I'm using is a Dell badged Samsung MCCOE50G5MPQ-0VAD3.
So the key is the drive needs to have the Dell badging
Ross Walker wrote:
On Aug 4, 2009, at 10:22 PM, Bob Friesenhahn > wrote:
On Tue, 4 Aug 2009, Ross Walker wrote:
Are you sure that it is faster than an SSD? The data is indeed
pushed closer to the disks, but there may be considerably more
latency associated with getting that data into the c
Ross Walker wrote:
On Aug 4, 2009, at 8:36 PM, Carson Gaspar wrote:
Ross Walker wrote:
I get pretty good NFS write speeds with NVRAM (40MB/s 4k sequential
write). It's a Dell PERC 6/e with 512MB onboard.
...
there, dedicated slog device with NVRAM speed. It would be even
better to have a
On Aug 4, 2009, at 10:22 PM, Bob Friesenhahn > wrote:
On Tue, 4 Aug 2009, Ross Walker wrote:
Are you sure that it is faster than an SSD? The data is indeed
pushed closer to the disks, but there may be considerably more
latency associated with getting that data into the controller
NVRAM ca
On Aug 4, 2009, at 10:17 PM, James Lever wrote:
On 05/08/2009, at 11:41 AM, Ross Walker wrote:
What is your recipe for these?
There wasn't one! ;)
The drive I'm using is a Dell badged Samsung MCCOE50G5MPQ-0VAD3.
So the key is the drive needs to have the Dell badging to work?
I called m
On Tue, 4 Aug 2009, Ross Walker wrote:
Are you sure that it is faster than an SSD? The data is indeed pushed
closer to the disks, but there may be considerably more latency associated
with getting that data into the controller NVRAM cache than there is into a
dedicated slog SSD.
I don't see
On Aug 4, 2009, at 9:55 PM, Carson Gaspar wrote:
Ross Walker wrote:
On Aug 4, 2009, at 8:36 PM, Carson Gaspar wrote:
Isn't the PERC 6/e just a re-branded LSI? LSI added SSD support
recently.
Yes, but the LSI support of SSDs is on later controllers.
Please cite your source for that stat
On 05/08/2009, at 11:41 AM, Ross Walker wrote:
What is your recipe for these?
There wasn't one! ;)
The drive I'm using is a Dell badged Samsung MCCOE50G5MPQ-0VAD3.
cheers,
James
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail
Ross Walker wrote:
On Aug 4, 2009, at 8:36 PM, Carson Gaspar wrote:
Isn't the PERC 6/e just a re-branded LSI? LSI added SSD support recently.
Yes, but the LSI support of SSDs is on later controllers.
Please cite your source for that statement.
The PERC 6/e is an LSI 1078. The LSI web sit
On Aug 4, 2009, at 9:37 PM, James Lever wrote:
On 05/08/2009, at 11:36 AM, Ross Walker wrote:
Which model?
PERC 6/E w/512MB BBWC.
Really?
You know I tried flashing mine with LSI's firmware and while it seemed
to take it still didn't recognize my mtrons.
What is your recipe for these
On 05/08/2009, at 11:36 AM, Ross Walker wrote:
Which model?
PERC 6/E w/512MB BBWC.
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
On Aug 4, 2009, at 9:18 PM, James Lever wrote:
On 05/08/2009, at 10:36 AM, Carson Gaspar wrote:
Isn't the PERC 6/e just a re-branded LSI? LSI added SSD support
recently.
Yep, it's a mega raid device.
I have been using one with a Samsung SSD in RAID0 mode (to avail
myself of the cache)
On Aug 4, 2009, at 8:36 PM, Carson Gaspar wrote:
Ross Walker wrote:
I get pretty good NFS write speeds with NVRAM (40MB/s 4k sequential
write). It's a Dell PERC 6/e with 512MB onboard.
...
there, dedicated slog device with NVRAM speed. It would be even
better to have a pair of SSDs behind
On 05/08/2009, at 10:36 AM, Carson Gaspar wrote:
Isn't the PERC 6/e just a re-branded LSI? LSI added SSD support
recently.
Yep, it's a mega raid device.
I have been using one with a Samsung SSD in RAID0 mode (to avail
myself of the cache) recently with great success.
cheers,
James
What shall I do ? my server is not support ssd . go back to use 0811 ?
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Ross Walker wrote:
I get pretty good NFS write speeds with NVRAM (40MB/s 4k sequential
write). It's a Dell PERC 6/e with 512MB onboard.
...
there, dedicated slog device with NVRAM speed. It would be even better
to have a pair of SSDs behind the NVRAM, but it's hard to find
compatible SSDs for
On Aug 4, 2009, at 1:35 PM, Bob Friesenhahn > wrote:
On Tue, 4 Aug 2009, Ross Walker wrote:
But this MUST happen. If it doesn't then you are playing Russian
Roulette with your data, as a kernel panic can cause a loss of up to
1/8 of the size of your system's RAM (ZFS lazy write cache) of your
On Tue, 4 Aug 2009, Ross Walker wrote:
But this MUST happen. If it doesn't then you are playing Russian
Roulette with your data, as a kernel panic can cause a loss of up to
1/8 of the size of your system's RAM (ZFS lazy write cache) of your
iSCSI target's data!
The actual risk (with recent zfs
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Ross Walker wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 9:57 AM, Charles Baker wrote:
>>> My testing has shown some serious problems with the
>>> iSCSI implementation for OpenSolaris.
>>>
>>> I setup a VMware vSphere 4 box with RAID 10
>>> direct-attached storage and 3 virtual
This has been a very enlightening thread for me, and explains a lot of the
performance data I have collected on both 2008.11 and 2009.06 which mirrors the
experiences here. Thanks to you all.
NFS perf tuning, here I come...
-Scott
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
__
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 9:57 AM, Charles Baker wrote:
>> My testing has shown some serious problems with the
>> iSCSI implementation for OpenSolaris.
>>
>> I setup a VMware vSphere 4 box with RAID 10
>> direct-attached storage and 3 virtual machines:
>> - OpenSolaris 2009.06 (snv_111b) running 64-bi
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 10:40 AM, erik.ableson wrote:
> You're running into the same problem I had with 2009.06 as they have
> "corrected" a bug where the iSCSI target prior to
> 2009.06 didn't honor completely SCSI sync commands issued by the initiator.
> Some background :
> Discussion:
> http://op
You're running into the same problem I had with 2009.06 as they have
"corrected" a bug where the iSCSI target prior to 2009.06 didn't honor
completely SCSI sync commands issued by the initiator.
Some background :
Discussion:
http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=388492
"correcte
> My testing has shown some serious problems with the
> iSCSI implementation for OpenSolaris.
>
> I setup a VMware vSphere 4 box with RAID 10
> direct-attached storage and 3 virtual machines:
> - OpenSolaris 2009.06 (snv_111b) running 64-bit
> - CentOS 5.3 x64 (ran yum update)
> - Ubuntu Server 9.
39 matches
Mail list logo
