On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 11:34 PM, Paul B. Henson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We have been evaluating ZFS as a potential solution for delivering > enterprise file services for our campus. ... > I was thinking about allocating 2 drives for the OS (SVM mirroring, pending > ZFS boot support), two hot spares, and allocating the other 44 drives as > mirror pairs into a single pool. While this will result in lower available > space than raidz, my understanding is that it should provide much better > performance.
As a regular fileserver, yes - random reads of small files on raidz isn't too hot... > Has there been a final resolution on the x4500 I/O hanging issue? I think I > saw a thread the other day about an IDR that seems promising to fix it, if > we go this route hopefully that will be resolved before we go production. I just disable NCQ and have done with it. > It seems like kind of a waste to allocate 1TB to the operating system, > would there be any issue in taking a slice of those boot disks and creating > a zfs mirror with them to add to the pool? Personally, I wouldn't - I do like pool-level separation of data and OS. What I normally do in these cases is to create a separate pool and use it for something else useful. > I'm planning on using snapshots for online backups, maintaining perhaps 10 > days worth. At 6000 filesystems, that would be 60000 snapshots floating > around, any potential scalability or performance issues with that? My only concern here would be how hard it would be to delete the snapshots. With that cycle, you're deleting 6000 snapshots a day, and while snapshot creation is "free", my experience is that snapshot deletion is not. -- -Peter Tribble http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
