Re: [zfs-discuss] GSoC 09 zfs ideas?
On Sat, 28 Feb 2009 21:45:12 -0600, Mike Gerdts mger...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 8:34 PM, Nicolas Williams nicolas.willi...@sun.com wrote: [snip] Right, but normally each head in a cluster will have only one pool imported. Not necessarily. Suppose I have a group of servers with a bunch of zones. Each zone represents a service group that needs to independently fail over between servers. In that case, I may have a zpool per zone. It seems this is how it is done in the real world.[1] 1. Upton, Tom. A Conversation with Jason Hoffman. ACM Queue. January/February 2008. 9. Exactly. Or even a zpool per application, if there is more than one application in a zone. In that sense, I would call a zpool a unit of maintenance. Or a unit of failure. -- ( Kees Nuyt ) c[_] ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Max size of log device?
Le 8 févr. 09 à 13:12, Vincent Fox a écrit : Thanks I think I get it now. Do you think having log on a 15K RPM drive with the main pool composed of 10K RPM drives will show worthwhile improvements? Or am I chasing a few percentage points? In cases where logzilla helps, then this should help by a factor of 15/10. I don't have money for new hardware SSD. Just recycling some old components here are and there are a few 15K RPM drives on the shelf I thought I could throw strategically into the mix. Application will likely be NFS serving. Might use same setup for a list-serve system which does have local storage for archived emails etc. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Max size of log device?
Le 8 févr. 09 à 13:44, David Magda a écrit : On Feb 8, 2009, at 16:12, Vincent Fox wrote: Do you think having log on a 15K RPM drive with the main pool composed of 10K RPM drives will show worthwhile improvements? Or am I chasing a few percentage points? Another important question is whether it would be sufficient to purchase only one 15K disk, or should two be purchased and they be mirrored? Worth repeating here... it can be done but not necessary. What would happen if the device that the ZIL lives on suddenly goes away or start returning checksum errors? nothing, the ZIL is just read in case of host failure/reboot. Mirroring log devices helps to survive double failure scenario : (1 log device + host failure). If log devices goes away the system starts to behave as if no separate log was configured and the zil just uses the main storage pool. While an SSD is theoretically less likely to fail in some respects (no mechanical parts), what happens if it fails? synchronous writes starts to be handled at higher latency, nothing else. How important is mirroring on log devices? Another question comes to mind: if you have multiple pools, can they all share one log device? For example, if you have twelve disks in a JBOD, and assign disks 1-4 are in mypool0, disks 4-8 are in mypool1, and disks 9-12 are in mypool2. Can you then have one SSD that can be allocated as the log device for all the pools? I'd think so, you just need to partition it 3-way. -r ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Virutal zfs server vs hardware zfs server
Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com writes: www.jtan.com/~reader/SDDToolReport-chub-OpenSolaris.html I see the following there: Solaris Bundled Driver: * vgatext/ ** radeon Video ATI Technologies Inc R360 NJ [Radeon 9800 XT] I *think* this is the same driver used with my work laptop (which I don't have at hand to check, unfortunately), also with ATI graphics hardware. As far as I know the situation with ATI is that, while ATI supplies well-performing binary drivers for MS Windows (of course) and Linux, there is no such thing for other OSs. So OpenSolaris uses standardized interfaces of the graphics hardware, which have comparatively low bandwidth. This leads to very unimpressive graphics performance, up to the point that the machine nearly freezes when large images are loaded into the graphics adapter. Most of my work is text-oriented (lots of XTerms and one XEmacs, mostly) with some web browsing and the occasional GUI tool thrown in, and this works mostly fine on the system. Even picture processing with Gimp from time to time is okay, while not fast. (And I do not mean not blindingly fast, but rather really not fast.) But there are things that really are a pain, e. g. web pages that constantly blend one picture into the other, for instance http://www.strato.de/ . While you would not notice that, usually, this page makes my laptop really slow, such that it requires significant effort even to find and press the button to close the window. Still, I find that bearable given that I have Solaris running on the machine (as my target platform is Solaris 10) including ZFS goodness. On the other hand, I understand that you want to build a server, not a workstation type machine. Graphics performance should be irrelevant in this case. If it is not, you might consider another graphics adapter. To my knowledge the situation is much better with NVIDIA hardware. Regards, Juergen. -- Unix gives you just enough rope to hang yourself -- and then a couple of more feet, just to be sure.-- Eric Allman ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
