Hi Niels,
On 1/21/26 10:33, Niels Dettenbach wrote:
I would recommend to try it - it is easy to create some single device zfs
pool on a empty disk or array or even a partition.
I’m wondering whether the relatively weak CPU might be a bottleneck. I
seem to recall that during my load tests - especially with ZVOLs - I
observed a significant number of TLB shootdowns, whereas this did not
occur with raw/CCD devices. Could these observations be related?
Because of compatibility issues we use linux dom0 but plan to test / migrate
NetBSD here as well. So i can not guarantee for the NetBSD version.
To me, ZFS is significabtly faster then LVM - at least
thanks for the interesting details - much appreciated.
Using a Linux Dom0 means that all ZFS-related machinery lives in the
Linux kernel. I would assume that this is a considerably more recent ZFS
implementation than what I currently have available in NetBSD 10.1, and
likely also more optimized from a performance perspective. That could
very well explain some of the differences I observed, compared to your
experiences.
I would indeed be very interested to see how the same setup behaves on
identical hardware with NetBSD as Dom0, just to get a more direct
comparison.
In principle, I could also try to reproduce a similar setup myself on my
low-spec hardware to get some hands-on data. On the other hand, for this
small home-server appliance I am trying to avoid a mixed setup. I also
want to use this project as an exercise in supply-chain self-control and
reduction of complexity; introducing Linux solely as Dom0 would somewhat
defeat that goal and make the overall system more complex than I’d like.
Thanks again for sharing your experience.
Best regards,
Matthias
--
Für alle, die digitale Systeme verstehen und gestalten wollen:
jede Woche neue Beiträge zu Architektur, Souveränität und Systemdesign.
👉 https://www.petermann-digital.de/blog
