Am 19.12.2011 17:36, schrieb Michael Reifenberger:
Hi,
a quick test using `dd if=/dev/zero of=/test ...` shows:
dT: 10.004s w: 10.000s filter: ^a?da?.$
L(q) ops/sr/s kBps ms/rw/s kBps ms/w %busy Name
0378 0 0 12.5376 36414 11.9 60.6| ada0
Am 19.12.2011 22:53, schrieb Dan Nelson:
In the last episode (Dec 19), Stefan Esser said:
poolalloc free read write read write
-- - - - - - -
raid1 4.41T 2.21T139 72 12.3M 818K
raidz14.41T 2.21T139 72
On Mon, 19 Dec 2011, Peter Maloney wrote:
...
Thanks for the info. But I am confused by it, because when my disks
moved around randomly on reboot, it really did mess things up. The first
few times it happened, there was no issue, but when a spare took the
place of a pool disk, it messed things
Hi ZFS users,
for quite some time I have observed an uneven distribution of load
between drives in a 4 * 2TB RAIDZ1 pool. The following is an excerpt of
a longer log of 10 second averages logged with gstat:
dT: 10.001s w: 10.000s filter: ^a?da?.$
L(q) ops/sr/s kBps ms/rw/s kBps
2011/12/19 Stefan Esser s...@freebsd.org:
Hi ZFS users,
for quite some time I have observed an uneven distribution of load
between drives in a 4 * 2TB RAIDZ1 pool. The following is an excerpt of
a longer log of 10 second averages logged with gstat:
dT: 10.001s w: 10.000s filter: ^a?da?.$
On 12/19/2011 03:22 PM, Stefan Esser wrote:
Hi ZFS users,
for quite some time I have observed an uneven distribution of load
between drives in a 4 * 2TB RAIDZ1 pool. The following is an excerpt of
a longer log of 10 second averages logged with gstat:
dT: 10.001s w: 10.000s filter:
Hi,
a quick test using `dd if=/dev/zero of=/test ...` shows:
dT: 10.004s w: 10.000s filter: ^a?da?.$
L(q) ops/sr/s kBps ms/rw/s kBps ms/w %busy Name
0378 0 0 12.5376 36414 11.9 60.6| ada0
0380 0 0 12.2378 36501 11.8
In the last episode (Dec 19), Stefan Esser said:
for quite some time I have observed an uneven distribution of load between
drives in a 4 * 2TB RAIDZ1 pool. The following is an excerpt of a longer
log of 10 second averages logged with gstat:
dT: 10.001s w: 10.000s filter: ^a?da?.$
L(q)
On Mon, 19 Dec 2011, Peter Maloney wrote:
Swapping disks (or even removing one depending on controller, etc. when
it fails) without labels can be bad.
eg.
Since ZFS uses (and searches for) its own UUID partition signatures s
disk wapping shouldn't matter as long enough disks are found.
Set
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 6:22 AM, Stefan Esser s...@freebsd.org wrote:
Hi ZFS users,
for quite some time I have observed an uneven distribution of load
between drives in a 4 * 2TB RAIDZ1 pool. The following is an excerpt of
a longer log of 10 second averages logged with gstat:
dT: 10.001s
I have observed similar behavior, even more extreme on a spool with dedup
enabled. Is dedup enabled on this spool?
Might be that the DDT tables somehow end up unevenly distributed to disks. My
observation was on a 6 disk raidz2.
Daniel___
Am 19.12.2011 15:36, schrieb Olivier Smedts:
2011/12/19 Stefan Esser s...@freebsd.org:
So: Can anybody reproduce this distribution requests?
Hello,
Stupid question, but are your drives all exactly the same ? I noticed
ashift: 12 so I think you should have at least one 4k-sector drive,
Am 19.12.2011 16:42, schrieb Peter Maloney:
On 12/19/2011 03:22 PM, Stefan Esser wrote:
So: Can anybody reproduce this distribution requests?
I don't have a raidz1 machine, and no time to make you a special raidz1
pool out of spare disks, but on my raidz2 I can only ever see unevenness
when a
Am 19.12.2011 17:22, schrieb Dan Nelson:
In the last episode (Dec 19), Stefan Esser said:
for quite some time I have observed an uneven distribution of load between
drives in a 4 * 2TB RAIDZ1 pool. The following is an excerpt of a longer
log of 10 second averages logged with gstat:
dT:
Am 19.12.2011 17:48, schrieb Michael Reifenberger:
On Mon, 19 Dec 2011, Peter Maloney wrote:
Swapping disks (or even removing one depending on controller, etc. when
it fails) without labels can be bad.
eg.
Since ZFS uses (and searches for) its own UUID partition signatures s
disk wapping
Am 19.12.2011 17:36, schrieb Michael Reifenberger:
Hi,
a quick test using `dd if=/dev/zero of=/test ...` shows:
dT: 10.004s w: 10.000s filter: ^a?da?.$
L(q) ops/sr/s kBps ms/rw/s kBps ms/w %busy Name
0378 0 0 12.5376 36414 11.9 60.6| ada0
Am 19.12.2011 18:05, schrieb Garrett Cooper:
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 6:22 AM, Stefan Esser s...@freebsd.org wrote:
Hi ZFS users,
for quite some time I have observed an uneven distribution of load
between drives in a 4 * 2TB RAIDZ1 pool. The following is an excerpt of
a longer log of 10
On Dec 19, 2011, at 12:54 PM, Stefan Esser wrote:
Am 19.12.2011 18:05, schrieb Garrett Cooper:
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 6:22 AM, Stefan Esser s...@freebsd.org wrote:
Hi ZFS users,
for quite some time I have observed an uneven distribution of load
between drives in a 4 * 2TB RAIDZ1 pool. The
Am 19.12.2011 19:03, schrieb Daniel Kalchev:
I have observed similar behavior, even more extreme on a spool with dedup
enabled. Is dedup enabled on this spool?
Thank you for the report!
Well, I had dedup enabled for a few short tests. But since I have got
only 8GB of RAM and dedup seems to
On Dec 19, 2011, at 11:00 PM, Stefan Esser wrote:
Am 19.12.2011 19:03, schrieb Daniel Kalchev:
I have observed similar behavior, even more extreme on a spool with dedup
enabled. Is dedup enabled on this spool?
Thank you for the report!
Well, I had dedup enabled for a few short tests.
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 1:07 PM, Daniel Kalchev dan...@digsys.bg wrote:
On Dec 19, 2011, at 11:00 PM, Stefan Esser wrote:
Am 19.12.2011 19:03, schrieb Daniel Kalchev:
I have observed similar behavior, even more extreme on a spool with dedup
enabled. Is dedup enabled on this spool?
Thank
Am 19.12.2011 22:00, schrieb Garrett Cooper:
On Dec 19, 2011, at 12:54 PM, Stefan Esser wrote:
But it seems that others do not observe the asymmetric distribution of
requests, which makes me wonder whether I happen to have meta data
arranged in such a way that it is always read from ada0 or
Am 19.12.2011 22:07, schrieb Daniel Kalchev:
On Dec 19, 2011, at 11:00 PM, Stefan Esser wrote:
Well, I had dedup enabled for a few short tests. But since I have got
only 8GB of RAM and dedup seems to require an order of magnitude more
to be working well, I switched dedup off again after a few
In the last episode (Dec 19), Stefan Esser said:
Am 19.12.2011 17:22, schrieb Dan Nelson:
In the last episode (Dec 19), Stefan Esser said:
for quite some time I have observed an uneven distribution of load
between drives in a 4 * 2TB RAIDZ1 pool. The following is an excerpt
of a longer
On Dec 19, 2011, at 11:53 PM, Dan Nelson wrote:
Since it looks like the algorithm ends up creating two half-cold parity
disks instead of one cold disk, I bet a 3-disk RAIDZ would exhibit even
worse balancing, and a 5-disk set would be more even.
There were some experiments a year or two
25 matches
Mail list logo
