Al Hopper writes: > On Thu, 23 Nov 2006, Roch - PAE wrote: > > > > > Hi Al, You conclude: > > > > No problem there! ZFS rocks. NFS/ZFS is a bad combination. > > > > But my reading of your data leads to: > > > > single threaded small file creation is much slower > > over NFS than locally. regardless of the server FS. > > > > It's been posted on this alias before, Change ZFS to > > anything else and it won't change the conclusion. > > NFS/AnyFS is a bad combination for single threaded tar x. > > Hi Roch - you are correct in that the data presented was incomplete. I > did'nt present data for the same test with an NFS mount from the same > server, for a UFS based filesystem. So here is that data point: > > $ ptime gunzip -c /tmp/emacs-21.4a.tar.gz |tar xf - > > real 12.671 > user 2.356 > sys 0.228 > > This test is not totally fair, in that the UFS filesystem being shared is > on a single 400Gb SATA drive being used as the boot device - versus the > 5-way raidz config which consists of 5 of those same 400Gb SATA drives. > But the data clearly shows the NFS/ZFS is a bad combination: 2 minutes 33 > Seconds for NFS/ZFS versus 13 Seconds (rouding up) for NFS/UFS. >
Thanks Al. I'd put 100$ on the table that the WCE is enabled on the SATA drive backing UFS. Even if format says it's not, are there not some drives which just ignore the WC disable commands ? -r > Regards, > > Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT > OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 > OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
