HW RAID can offload some I/O bandwidth from the system, but new systems,
like Thumper, should have more than enough bandwidth, so why bother with
HW RAID?
*devils advocate mode = on*
Why bother you say...
I'll asked the Storagetek division this, next time they come round
asking (begging?) me
At the moment, I'm hearing that using h/w raid under my zfs may be
better for some workloads and the h/w hot spare would be nice to
have across multiple raid groups, but the checksum capabilities in
zfs are basically nullified with single/multiple h/w lun's
resulting in reduced protection.
Has anyone done a comparison of the reliability and performance of a
mirrored zpool vs. a non-redundant zpool using ditto blocks? What about
a gut-instinct about which will give better performance? Or do I have
to wait until my Thumper arrives to find out for myself?
Also, in selecting where a
On 5/23/07, Moore, Joe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Has anyone done a comparison of the reliability and performance of a
mirrored zpool vs. a non-redundant zpool using ditto blocks? What about
a gut-instinct about which will give better performance? Or do I have
to wait until my Thumper arrives to
Sorry about that, the specific processor in question
is the Pentium D 930 which supports 64 bit computing
through the Extended Memory 64 Technology. It was my
initial reaction to say I'd go with 32 bit computing
because my general experience with 64-bit is Windows,
Linux, and some FreeBSD.
On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 08:03:41AM -0700, Tom Buskey wrote:
Solaris is 64 bits with support for 32 bits. I've been running 64 bit
Solaris since Solaris 7 as I imagine most Solaris users have. I don't think
any other major 64 bit OS has been in general use as long (VMS?).
IRIX, AIX,
I have a T2000 with an 11/06 release of Solaris 10 installed. I had created a
zpool with one LUN in it. Due to an apparent incompatibility with our HBA's and
switches I unplugged the fibre cables from the server's HBAs. Obviously this is
a dev server ;)
Two days later an admin logs in on the
ZFS will panic during I/O failure if the zpool is not fully redundant.
So you need 2 hba, 2 switches and a RAID10 zpool to keep your server running.
Also upgrade to snv_60 or newer. Older release can corrupt your zpool!
gino
This message posted from opensolaris.org
Hi.
I'm all set for doing performance comparsion between Solaris/ZFS and
FreeBSD/ZFS. I spend last few weeks on FreeBSD/ZFS optimizations and I
think I'm ready. The machine is 1xQuad-core DELL PowerEdge 1950, 2GB
RAM, 15 x 74GB-FC-10K accesses via 2x2Gbit FC links. Unfortunately the
links to
Hello,
So I downloaded this module and integrated it into my samba 3.0.25 source
directory, reconfigured, and did a clean build and install. Problem is, it
doesn't appear that the zfsacl plugin was installed anywhere.
Forgive me if this is a newbie question, but how do I get smbd to use that
Moore, Joe wrote:
Has anyone done a comparison of the reliability and performance of a
mirrored zpool vs. a non-redundant zpool using ditto blocks? What about
a gut-instinct about which will give better performance? Or do I have
to wait until my Thumper arrives to find out for myself?
It all
If you've got the internal system bandwidth to drive all drives then RAID-Z
is definitely
superior to HW RAID-5. Same with mirroring.
You'll need twice as much I/O bandwidth as with a hardware controller, plus the
redundancy, since the reconstruction is done by the host. For instance, to
What about if the pool contains only 1 LUN
In my case, my mirrorring or other data protection mecanism is done
in my storage array so I dont want to setup a mirror on the host side
After the LUN is grown, I go in format -e to autodetect my new device
size and then I write a new EFI label on it
13 matches
Mail list logo
