Re: ZFS bonnie puzzlement
are showing me. Read performance OTOH is strange, zpool and systat both reporting consistently an aggregated read speed of around 120MB/s during the block read tests (which seems a bit slow for the drives - and indeed systat reports the drives at less than 50% utilisation) but bonnie is only reporting 35MB/s, I see similar discrepancies with simple dd block reads to /dev/null, in which case my stopwatch agrees with dd. no it is not wrong. Do more tests (possibly your own doing heavy mixed workload) to understand well why you should not use this last word in filesystems. Discover it alone. I told already enough about it but it results in attacks from ZFS (and general new technology) fanatics. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: ZFS bonnie puzzlement
On Sun, 5 Aug 2012 13:29:51 +0200 (CEST) Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote: are showing me. Read performance OTOH is strange, zpool and systat both reporting consistently an aggregated read speed of around 120MB/s during the block read tests (which seems a bit slow for the drives - and indeed systat reports the drives at less than 50% utilisation) but bonnie is only reporting 35MB/s, I see similar discrepancies with simple dd block reads to /dev/null, in which case my stopwatch agrees with dd. no it is not wrong. Do more tests (possibly your own doing heavy mixed workload) to understand well why you should not use this last word in filesystems. First surprise, with only 4GB I had set primarycache=metadata, changing that to primarycache=all caused the systat, zpool iostat and bonnie figures all to agree - and made them all a bit better too. Lesson from this - don't bother setting primarycache=metadata. With that puzzle gone testing and tuning becomes more useful: Enabling prefetch made a huge difference to the per char sequential read, but didn't really change anything else. Indeed this test is now CPU limited in bonnie - that'll do. Rebooting with zfs.cache_flush_disable=1 made everything faster. Block writes and reads maxed out the discs at around 110MB/s and 200MB/s respectively - pretty close to the raw disc speed. Rewrite nearly doubled in speed too. Next stop NFS tuning. -- Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays C:WIN | A better way to focus the sun The computer obeys and wins.|licences available see You lose and Bill collects. |http://www.sohara.org/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
RE: ZFS bonnie puzzlement
snip Discover it alone. I told already enough about it but it results in attacks from ZFS (and general new technology) fanatics. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org If the rest of the world thought like you we would still be trying to invent the wheel. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: ZFS bonnie puzzlement
First surprise, with only 4GB I had set primarycache=metadata, you mean 4 GIGABYTES of memory is ONLY? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
RE: ZFS bonnie puzzlement
If the rest of the world thought like you we would still be trying to invent the wheel. ??? what wheel. UFS is already invented. For LONG time. And UFS+softupdates works great. much better than new trash ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: ZFS bonnie puzzlement
On Sun, 5 Aug 2012 20:02:54 +0200 (CEST) Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote: First surprise, with only 4GB I had set primarycache=metadata, you mean 4 GIGABYTES of memory is ONLY? At less than €30 - yes I think only is reasonable, I'd have bought more but 4GB is all the motherboard would take. I've paid more than that for a *KILOBYTE* of memory - admittedly that was a long time ago. One big part of the changing landscape in computer economics is that RAM and disc are *cheap*. -- Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays C:WIN | A better way to focus the sun The computer obeys and wins.|licences available see You lose and Bill collects. |http://www.sohara.org/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
