Someone had tell me that s10u5 will not contain your need SSD or NVRAM separate
for zfs intent log.
Finally, s10u5 will only contain a small part of bugfix. But s10u6 will be a
quite huge wad of features/fixes.
Set nocacheflush=1 will huge improve your nfs client's performance when use a
On Jan 30, 2008 2:27 PM, Jonathan Loran [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Before ranting any more, I'll do the test of disabling the ZIL. We may
have to build out these systems with Open Solaris, but that will be hard
as they are in production. I would have to install the new OS on test
systems and
This is true, but I think it's the testing bit that worries me. It's
hard to lab out, and fully test an equivalent setup that has 350 active
clients pounding on it to test usability and stability. One of our
boxes has a boat load of special software running and various tweaks,
that also
I dont know when will U5 or U6 coming,so i just set zfs_nocacheflush=1 to
/etc/system,and the performance will speed up like zil_disable=1,and that's
more safe for the filesystem.
the separate zlog feature is not in U4,the nfs performance on zfs will be too
slow when you do not set
Guanghui Wang wrote:
I dont know when will U5 or U6 coming,so i just set zfs_nocacheflush=1 to
/etc/system,and the performance will speed up like zil_disable=1,and that's
more safe for the filesystem.
the separate zlog feature is not in U4,the nfs performance on zfs will be
too slow
Jonathan Loran writes:
Is it true that Solaris 10 u4 does not have any of the nice ZIL controls
that exist in the various recent Open Solaris flavors? I would like to
move my ZIL to solid state storage, but I fear I can't do it until I
have another update. Heck, I would be happy
Roch - PAE wrote:
Jonathan Loran writes:
Is it true that Solaris 10 u4 does not have any of the nice ZIL controls
that exist in the various recent Open Solaris flavors? I would like to
move my ZIL to solid state storage, but I fear I can't do it until I
have another update.
Neil Perrin wrote:
Roch - PAE wrote:
Jonathan Loran writes:
Is it true that Solaris 10 u4 does not have any of the nice ZIL
controls that exist in the various recent Open Solaris flavors? I
would like to move my ZIL to solid state storage, but I fear I
can't do it until I
Are you already running with zfs_nocacheflush=1? We have SAN arrays with dual
battery-backed controllers for the cache, so we definitely have this set on all
our production systems. It makes a big difference for us.
As I said before I don't see the catastrophe in disabling ZIL though.
We
On Jan 30, 2008, at 3:44 PM, Vincent Fox wrote:
What we ended up doing, for political reasons, was putting the
squeeze on our Sun reps and getting a 10u4 kernel spin patch with...
what did they call it? Oh yeah a big wad of ZFS fixes. So this
ends up being a hug PITA because for the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I feel like we're being hung out to dry here. I've got 70TB on 9 various
Solaris 10 u4 servers, with different data sets. All of these are NFS
servers. Two servers have a ton of small files, with a lot of read and
write updating, and NFS performance on these are
Vincent Fox wrote:
Are you already running with zfs_nocacheflush=1? We have SAN arrays with
dual battery-backed controllers for the cache, so we definitely have this set
on all our production systems. It makes a big difference for us.
No, we're not using the zfs_nocacheflush=1, but
Jonathan Loran wrote:
Vincent Fox wrote:
Are you already running with zfs_nocacheflush=1? We have SAN arrays with
dual battery-backed controllers for the cache, so we definitely have this
set on all our production systems. It makes a big difference for us.
No, we're not using the
No, we're not using the zfs_nocacheflush=1, but our
SAN array's are set
to cache all writebacks, so it shouldn't be needed.
I may test this, if
get the chance to reboot one of the servers, but
I'll bet the storage
rrays' are working correctly.
Bzzzt, wrong.
Read up on a few threads
However, I'm also unhappy about having to wait for S10U6 for the separate
ZIL and/or cache features of ZFS. The lack of NV ZIL on our new Thumper
makes it painfully slow over NFS for the large number of file create/delete
type of workload.
I did a bit of testing on this (because I'm in the
Is it true that Solaris 10 u4 does not have any of the nice ZIL controls
that exist in the various recent Open Solaris flavors? I would like to
move my ZIL to solid state storage, but I fear I can't do it until I
have another update. Heck, I would be happy to just be able to turn the
ZIL
http://www.solarisinternals.com/wiki/index.php/ZFS_Evil_Tuning_Guide#Disabling_the_ZIL_.28Don.27t.29
The above link shows how to disable to ZIL for testing purposes (it's
not generally recommended to
keep it disabled in production).
As to the putpack schedule of recent ZFS features into
On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 08:28:42PM -0500, Jim Mauro wrote:
As to the putpack schedule of recent ZFS features into Solaris 10, I'm
afraid I
don't have the information. Hopefully, someone else will know...
I've got a box that I'm setting up soon (now, really) and I'd love to know
when the
As other poster noted, you can disable it completely for testing.
From my understanding though, it's not as production-catastrophic as it
sounds to delay or disable ZIL.
Many people run Linux boxes with ext3 in the standard setting, which only
journals metadata, not file content. So the
19 matches
Mail list logo
