Andrew Snow wrote:
Ivan Voras wrote:
It is true that ZFS in theory doesn't do very well with random writes
of any kind - the kind that torrent clients do should actually be the
worst case for ZFS, *but*, this very much depends on the actual workload.
ZFS has aggressive read-ahead for sequential read-aheads, so its worth
noting that the performance problem can be mitigated by having lots of
RAM free for read-ahead, as well as multiple vdevs in the zpool (so that
it can be seeking all disks at once)
Yes and no. Read ahead will not help performance when the data is so
fragmented that the disk is seek-bound. No matter how much of the file
you can get in RAM, it still needs to be fetched from the drive
platters. (Except if it's smart enough to read sequential chunks from
the raw storage even though they are logically not located nearly, and
in case of torrents, probably belong to different files, which I very
much doubt it does).
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
