Hi again

Brent Jones wrote:
> 
> Scott,
> 
> Can you tell us the configuration that you're using that is working for you?
> Were you using RaidZ, or RaidZ2? I'm wondering what the "sweetspot" is
> to get a good compromise in vdevs and usable space/performance
>

Some time ago I made some tests to find this:

(1) create a new zpool
(2) Copy user's home to it (always the same ~ 25 GB IIRC)
(3) zfs send to /dev/null
(4) evaluate && continue loop

I did this for fully mirrored setups, raidz as well as raidz2, the
results were mixed:

https://n0.aei.uni-hannover.de/cgi-bin/twiki/view/ATLAS/ZFSBenchmarkTest#ZFS_send_performance_relevant_fo

The culprit here might be that in retrospect this seemed like a "good"
home filesystem, i.e. one which was quite fast.

If you don't want to bother with the table:

Mirrored setup never exceeded 58 MB/s and was getting faster the more
small mirrors you used.

RaidZ had its sweetspot with a configuration of '6 6 6 6 6 6 5 5', i.e.
6 or 5 disks per RaidZ and 8 vdevs

RaidZ2 finally was best at '10 9 9 9 9', i.e. 5 vdevs but not much worse
with only 3, i.e. what we are currently using to get more storage space
(gains us about 2 TB/box).

Cheers

Carsten
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Reply via email to