On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 8:03 AM, Edward Ned Harvey
<solar...@nedharvey.com> wrote:
>> > Seriously, all disks configured WriteThrough (spindle and SSD disks
>> > alike)
>> > using the dedicated ZIL SSD device, very noticeably faster than
>> > enabling the
>> > WriteBack.
>>
>> What do you get with both SSD ZIL and WriteBack disks enabled?
>>
>> I mean if you have both why not use both? Then both async and sync IO
>> benefits.
>
> Interesting, but unfortunately false.  Soon I'll post the results here.  I
> just need to package them in a way suitable to give the public, and stick it
> on a website.  But I'm fighting IT fires for now and haven't had the time
> yet.
>
> Roughly speaking, the following are approximately representative.  Of course
> it varies based on tweaks of the benchmark and stuff like that.
>        Stripe 3 mirrors write through:  450-780 IOPS
>        Stripe 3 mirrors write back:  1030-2130 IOPS
>        Stripe 3 mirrors write back + SSD ZIL:  1220-2480 IOPS
>        Stripe 3 mirrors write through + SSD ZIL:  1840-2490 IOPS
>
> Overall, I would say WriteBack is 2-3 times faster than naked disks.  SSD
> ZIL is 3-4 times faster than naked disk.  And for some reason, having the
> WriteBack enabled while you have SSD ZIL actually hurts performance by
> approx 10%.  You're better off to use the SSD ZIL with disks in Write
> Through mode.
>
> That result is surprising to me.  But I have a theory to explain it.  When
> you have WriteBack enabled, the OS issues a small write, and the HBA
> immediately returns to the OS:  "Yes, it's on nonvolatile storage."  So the
> OS quickly gives it another, and another, until the HBA write cache is full.
> Now the HBA faces the task of writing all those tiny writes to disk, and the
> HBA must simply follow orders, writing a tiny chunk to the sector it said it
> would write, and so on.  The HBA cannot effectively consolidate the small
> writes into a larger sequential block write.  But if you have the WriteBack
> disabled, and you have a SSD for ZIL, then ZFS can log the tiny operation on
> SSD, and immediately return to the process:  "Yes, it's on nonvolatile
> storage."  So the application can issue another, and another, and another.
> ZFS is smart enough to aggregate all these tiny write operations into a
> single larger sequential write before sending it to the spindle disks.

Hmm, when you did the write-back test was the ZIL SSD included in the
write-back?

What I was proposing was write-back only on the disks, and ZIL SSD
with no write-back.

Not all operations hit the ZIL, so it would still be nice to have the
non-ZIL operations return quickly.

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

Reply via email to