Re: [zfs-discuss] Some test results: ZFS + SAMBA + Sun Fire X4500 (Thumper)

2007-10-12 Thread Matthew Ahrens
Tim Thomas wrote:
 Hi
 
 this may be of interest:
 
 http://blogs.sun.com/timthomas/entry/samba_performance_on_sun_fire
 
 I appreciate that this is not a  frightfully clever set of tests but I 
 needed some throughout numbersand the easiest way to share the 
 results is to blog.

It seems that we can conclude that for this workload (streaming write over 
SAMBA), you saturated 2 x 1Gb/sec ethernet links, and the rest of the system 
(CPU, disk bandwidth) was under-utilized.

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


Re: [zfs-discuss] Some test results: ZFS + SAMBA + Sun Fire X4500 (Thumper)

2007-10-09 Thread Tim Thomas
Title: Signature




Will et al

I added a few extra graphs to the original posting today showing the
work that an individual disk was doing

http://blogs.sun.com/timthomas/entry/samba_performance_on_sun_fire

and ran the RAID-Z config with fewer disks just to see what happened.

http://blogs.sun.com/timthomas/entry/another_samba_test_on_sun

What I find nice about Thumper/X4500's is that they behave very
predictably..in my experience anyway.

Rgds

Tim
-- 


  

  Tim Thomas 
  Storage
Systems Product Group
   Sun Microsystems, Inc.
  
  Internal Extension: x(70)18097
Office Direct Dial: +44-161-905-8097
Mobile: +44-7802-212-209
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  

  




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


Re: [zfs-discuss] Some test results: ZFS + SAMBA + Sun Fire X4500 (Thumper)

2007-10-08 Thread Will Murnane
Hi Tim,
  Sorry for mailing you directly; I meant to reply to the list.  My mistake.
On 10/8/07, Tim Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 this was a one day project which is why I kept it simple and I don't
 have detailed data beyond what I collected for the graphs.
The graphs are pretty informative, even so.  You can see the
limitations of raid-z on it pretty clearly - 200 megabytes per second
requires six thousand IO/sec?!  That's about 30k per I/O, which lines
up with what's expected for 128k stripes on five-wide stripes... but
that's still a lot of overhead.

 I was lucky enough to have the hardware to put this together (threw this
 ?) together very quickly

 I work in Engineering in Sun's Systems Group in an ISV focused team. We
 are having some discussions in the team about running a full suite of
 tests against SAMBA on Thumper but no firm plans yet...it is all about
 scheduling :-(
I can certainly understand scheduling limitations, and look forward to
any further results.  Having local equivalents to the samba tests
would also be interesting - write a local file at maximum speed, and
see how fast that goes and how many I/Os that generates. for example.
Non-sequential tests would be neat, too.

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