Hey Karsten,

Very interesting data. Your test is inherently single-threaded so I'm not 
surprised that the benefits aren't more impressive -- the flash modules on the 
F20 card are optimized more for concurrent IOPS than single-threaded latency.

Adam

On Mar 30, 2010, at 3:30 AM, Karsten Weiss wrote:

> Hi, I did some tests on a Sun Fire x4540 with an external J4500 array 
> (connected via two
> HBA ports). I.e. there are 96 disks in total configured as seven 12-disk 
> raidz2 vdevs
> (plus system, spares, unused disks) providing a ~ 63 TB pool with fletcher4 
> checksums.
> The system was recently equipped with a Sun Flash Accelerator F20 with 4 FMod
> modules to be used as log devices (ZIL). I was using the latest snv_134 
> software release.
> 
> Here are some first performance numbers for the extraction of an uncompressed 
> 50 MB
> tarball on a Linux (CentOS 5.4 x86_64) NFS-client which mounted the test 
> filesystem
> (no compression or dedup) via NFSv3 (rsize=wsize=32k,sync,tcp,hard).
> 
> standard ZIL:               7m40s  (ZFS default)
> 1x SSD ZIL:                  4m07s  (Flash Accelerator F20)
> 2x SSD ZIL:                  2m42s  (Flash Accelerator F20)
> 2x SSD mirrored ZIL:   3m59s  (Flash Accelerator F20)
> 3x SSD ZIL:                  2m47s  (Flash Accelerator F20)
> 4x SSD ZIL:                  2m57s  (Flash Accelerator F20)
> disabled ZIL:               0m15s
> (local extraction        0m0.269s)
> 
> I was not so much interested in the absolute numbers but rather in the 
> relative
> performance differences between the standard ZIL, the SSD ZIL and the disabled
> ZIL cases.
> 
> Any opinions on the results? I wish the SSD ZIL performance was closer to the
> disabled ZIL case than it is right now.
> 
> ATM I tend to use two F20 FMods for the log and the two other FMods as L2ARC 
> cache
> devices (although the system has lots of system memory i.e. the L2ARC is not 
> really
> necessary). But the speedup of disabling the ZIL altogether is appealing (and 
> would
> probably be acceptable in this environment).
> -- 
> This message posted from opensolaris.org
> _______________________________________________
> zfs-discuss mailing list
> zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


--
Adam Leventhal, Fishworks                        http://blogs.sun.com/ahl

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

Reply via email to