> I've been using a simple model for small, random reads. In that model, > the performance of a raidz[12] set will be approximately equal to a single > disk. For example, if you have 6 disks, then the performance for the > 6-disk raidz2 set will be normalized to 1, and the performance of a 3-way > dynamic stripe of 2-way mirrors will have a normalized performance of 6. > I'd be very interested to see if your results concur.
Is this expected behavior? Assuming concurrent reads (not synchronous and sequential) I would naively expect an ndisk raidz2 pool to have a normalized performance of n for small reads. Is there some reason why a small read on a raidz2 is not statistically very likely to require I/O on only one device? Assuming a non-degraded pool of course. -- / Peter Schuller, InfiDyne Technologies HB PGP userID: 0xE9758B7D or 'Peter Schuller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>' Key retrieval: Send an E-Mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.scode.org _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
