On 15 feb 2010, at 23.33, Bob Beverage wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 10:06 PM, Brian E. Imhoff >> <beimh...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> I've seen exactly the same thing. Basically, terrible >> transfer rates >> with Windows >> and the server sitting there completely idle. > > I am also seeing this behaviour. It started somewhere around snv111 but I am > not sure exactly when. I used to get 30-40MB/s transfers over cifs but at > some point that dropped to roughly 7.5MB/s.
Wasn't zvol changed a while ago from asynchronous to synchronous? Could that be it? I don't understand that change at all - of course a zvol with or without iscsi to access it should behave exactly as a (not broken) disk, strictly obeying the protocol for write cache. cache flush etc. Having it entirely synchronous is in many cases almost as useless as having it asynchronous. Just as much as zfs itself should demands this from it's disks, as it does, I believe it should provide this itself when used as storage for others. To me it seems that the zvol+iscsi functionality seems not ready for production and needs more work. If anyone has any better explanation, please share it with me! I guess a good slog could help a bit, especially if you have a bursty write load. /ragge _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
