On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 11:48:09AM +0200, Robert Milkowski wrote: > MA> This test fundamentally requires waiting for lots of syncronous writes. > MA> Assuming no other activity on the system, the performance of syncronous > MA> writes does not scale with the number of drives, it scales with the > MA> drive's write latency. > > MA> If you were to alter the test to not require everything to be done > MA> synchronously, then you would see much different behavior. > > Does it mean that instead of creating one pool if I create two pools > with the same numbers of disks in summary, and run two tests at the > same time each on its own pool I should observe better scaling than > with one pool with all disks?
Yes, but a better solution would be to use one pool with multiple filesystems. The intent log is per filesystem, so if you can break up your workload into sub-loads that don't depend on the others being on disk synchronously, then you can put each sub-load on a different filesystem, and it will scale approximately with the number of filesystems. --matt _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
