Richard Elling wrote: > Adam N. Copeland wrote: > >> Thanks for the replies. >> >> It appears the problem is that we are I/O bound. We have our SAN guy >> looking into possibly moving us to faster spindles. In the meantime, I >> wanted to implement whatever was possible to give us breathing room. >> Turning off atime certainly helped, but we are definitely not completely >> out of the drink yet. >> >> I also found that disabling the ZFS cache flush as per the Evil Tuning >> Guide was a huge boon, considering we're on a battery-backed (non-Sun) SAN. >> >> > > Really? Which OS version are you on? This should have been > fixed in Solaris 10 5/08 (it is a fix in the [s]sd driver). Caveat: there > may be some devices which do not properly negotiate the SYNC_NV > bit. In my tests, using Solaris 10 5/08, disabling the cache flush made > zero difference. >
PSARC 2007/053 If I read through the code correctly... If the array doesn't respond to the device inquiry, you haven't made an entry to sd.conf for the array, or it isn't hard coded in the sd.c table - I think there are only two in that state - then you'd have to disable the cache flush. _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
