Re: [zfs-discuss] slog tests on read throughput exhaustion (NFS)

2007-11-19 Thread Roch - PAE
Neil Perrin writes: Joe Little wrote: On Nov 16, 2007 9:13 PM, Neil Perrin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joe, I don't think adding a slog helped in this case. In fact I believe it made performance worse. Previously the ZIL would be spread out over all devices but now all

Re: [zfs-discuss] slog tests on read throughput exhaustion (NFS)

2007-11-19 Thread Neil Perrin
Roch - PAE wrote: Neil Perrin writes: Joe Little wrote: On Nov 16, 2007 9:13 PM, Neil Perrin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joe, I don't think adding a slog helped in this case. In fact I believe it made performance worse. Previously the ZIL would be spread out over

Re: [zfs-discuss] slog tests on read throughput exhaustion (NFS)

2007-11-18 Thread Richard Elling
one more thing... Joe Little wrote: I have historically noticed that in ZFS, when ever there is a heavy writer to a pool via NFS, the reads can held back (basically paused). An example is a RAID10 pool of 6 disks, whereby a directory of files including some large 100+MB in size being written

Re: [zfs-discuss] slog tests on read throughput exhaustion (NFS)

2007-11-18 Thread Joe Little
On Nov 18, 2007 1:44 PM, Richard Elling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: one more thing... Joe Little wrote: I have historically noticed that in ZFS, when ever there is a heavy writer to a pool via NFS, the reads can held back (basically paused). An example is a RAID10 pool of 6 disks, whereby a

Re: [zfs-discuss] slog tests on read throughput exhaustion (NFS)

2007-11-17 Thread Joe Little
On Nov 16, 2007 10:41 PM, Neil Perrin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joe Little wrote: On Nov 16, 2007 9:13 PM, Neil Perrin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joe, I don't think adding a slog helped in this case. In fact I believe it made performance worse. Previously the ZIL would be spread out

[zfs-discuss] slog tests on read throughput exhaustion (NFS)

2007-11-16 Thread Joe Little
I have historically noticed that in ZFS, when ever there is a heavy writer to a pool via NFS, the reads can held back (basically paused). An example is a RAID10 pool of 6 disks, whereby a directory of files including some large 100+MB in size being written can cause other clients over NFS to pause

Re: [zfs-discuss] slog tests on read throughput exhaustion (NFS)

2007-11-16 Thread Neil Perrin
Joe, I don't think adding a slog helped in this case. In fact I believe it made performance worse. Previously the ZIL would be spread out over all devices but now all synchronous traffic is directed at one device (and everything is synchronous in NFS). Mind you 15MB/s seems a bit on the slow

Re: [zfs-discuss] slog tests on read throughput exhaustion (NFS)

2007-11-16 Thread Joe Little
On Nov 16, 2007 9:13 PM, Neil Perrin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joe, I don't think adding a slog helped in this case. In fact I believe it made performance worse. Previously the ZIL would be spread out over all devices but now all synchronous traffic is directed at one device (and everything

Re: [zfs-discuss] slog tests on read throughput exhaustion (NFS)

2007-11-16 Thread Joe Little
On Nov 16, 2007 9:17 PM, Joe Little [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Nov 16, 2007 9:13 PM, Neil Perrin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joe, I don't think adding a slog helped in this case. In fact I believe it made performance worse. Previously the ZIL would be spread out over all devices but now