On Mon, 27 Apr 2009, Marion Hakanson wrote:
I guess one question I'd add is: The "ops" numbers seem pretty small. Is it possible to give enough spindles to a pool to handle that many IOP's without needing an NVRAM cache? I know latency comes into play at some point, but are we at that point?
Your IOPS don't seem high. You are currently using RAID-5, which is a poor choice for a database. If you use ZFS mirrors you are going to unleash a lot more IOPS from the available spindles.
I have a 2540 here, but a very fast version with 12 300GB 15K RPM SAS drives arranged as six mirrors (2540 is configured like a JBOD). While I don't run a database, I have run an IOPS benchmark with random writers (8K blocks) and see a peak of 3708 ops/sec. With a SATA model you are not likely to see half of that.
I am not familiar with zilstat. Presumaby the '93' is actually 930 ops/second?
Bob -- Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer, http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
