://www.gsoft.com.au
The nice thing about standards is that there
are so many of them to choose from.
-- Andrew Tanenbaum
GPG Fingerprint - 5596 B766 97C0 0E94 4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C
Right now (while experience slow writes via samba+zfs) this is general
read speed off a 4 x 1.5TB sata2 raidz1
via samba+zfs) this is general
read speed off a 4 x 1.5TB sata2 raidz1:
# dd if=test.file of=/dev/null
13753502+1 records in
13753502+1 records out
7041793036 bytes transferred in 100.020897 secs (70403218 bytes/sec)
That's not in the same ball park of slow writes, but it is below what
I
Thankyou for suggestion Peter , didn't solve it, and no its not the disks
, I have been monitoring gstat and its doing what it should, NFS works
just fine.
Here is typical NFS session from tcpdump
07:13:42.192671 IP asterisk.nfsd desktop.kink: Flags [.], ack 19048093,
win 29124, length 0
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 5:30 AM, Dan The Man d...@sunsaturn.com wrote:
Thankyou for suggestion Peter , didn't solve it, and no its not the disks ,
I have been monitoring gstat and its doing what it should, NFS works just
fine.
...
Its always sitting in rpcsvc around 2% cpu doing what it
CE8C
Right now (while experience slow writes via samba+zfs) this is general
read speed off a 4 x 1.5TB sata2 raidz1:
# dd if=test.file of=/dev/null
13753502+1 records in
13753502+1 records out
7041793036 bytes transferred in 100.020897 secs (70403218 bytes/sec)
That's not in the same ball park
slow writes via samba+zfs) this is general
read speed off a 4 x 1.5TB sata2 raidz1:
# dd if=test.file of=/dev/null
13753502+1 records in
13753502+1 records out
7041793036 bytes transferred in 100.020897 secs (70403218 bytes/sec)
That's not in the same ball park of slow writes, but it is below what
I
On 11/09/2011 08:07 AM, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
On 09/11/2011, at 17:32, Garrett Cooper wrote
dd's of large files (spooled backups going to tape) to /dev/null are as
slow as Samba.
- Dedupe?
Nope.
You are probably right, but just to be sure, let's verify that with:
zpool get dedupratio
On Nov 8, 2011, at 11:07 PM, Daniel O'Connor docon...@gsoft.com.au wrote:
On 09/11/2011, at 17:32, Garrett Cooper wrote
dd's of large files (spooled backups going to tape) to /dev/null are as
slow as Samba.
- Dedupe?
Nope.
- Compression?
On the mail spool ports, but not on the
On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 1:39 PM, Garrett Cooper yaneg...@gmail.com wrote:
On Nov 8, 2011, at 11:07 PM, Daniel O'Connor docon...@gsoft.com.au wrote:
On 09/11/2011, at 17:32, Garrett Cooper wrote
dd's of large files (spooled backups going to tape) to /dev/null are as
slow as Samba.
-
27, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Dan d...@sunsaturn.com wrote:
Updated from 9.0 beta3 to RC1 and using mkvmerge over samba/zfs
its taking over an hour to just mux in things like DTS english, where it was
15 minutes on beta3.
Hi Dan,
- Can you do more deterministic / scientific benchmarks?
- Did you
2011, Garrett Cooper wrote:
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Dan d...@sunsaturn.com wrote:
Updated from 9.0 beta3 to RC1 and using mkvmerge over samba/zfs
its taking over an hour to just mux in things like DTS english, where it
was
15 minutes on beta3.
Hi Dan,
- Can you do more deterministic
wrote:
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Dan d...@sunsaturn.com wrote:
Updated from 9.0 beta3 to RC1 and using mkvmerge over samba/zfs
its taking over an hour to just mux in things like DTS english, where it
was
15 minutes on beta3.
Hi Dan,
- Can you do more deterministic / scientific
...@sunsaturn.com
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011, Garrett Cooper wrote:
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Dan d...@sunsaturn.com wrote:
Updated from 9.0 beta3 to RC1 and using mkvmerge over samba/zfs
its taking over an hour to just mux in things like DTS english, where it
was
15 minutes on beta3.
Hi Dan
Websites, Domains and Everything else
http://www.SunSaturn.com
Email: d...@sunsaturn.com
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011, Garrett Cooper wrote:
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Dan d...@sunsaturn.com wrote:
Updated from 9.0 beta3 to RC1 and using mkvmerge over samba/zfs
its taking over an hour to just
On 09/11/2011, at 16:29, Kurt Touet wrote:
Is anyone else seeing problems like this with samba/zfs ?Perhaps
it's not exclusive to samba, either?
Yep, I see this too.
I can get 80-100Mbyte/sec reads out of a single disk but ZFS is (now) very slow
- it reads writes and much more slowly
On 09/11/2011, at 16:56, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
On 09/11/2011, at 16:29, Kurt Touet wrote:
Is anyone else seeing problems like this with samba/zfs ?Perhaps
it's not exclusive to samba, either?
Yep, I see this too.
I can get 80-100Mbyte/sec reads out of a single disk but ZFS is (now
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 10:28 PM, Daniel O'Connor docon...@gsoft.com.au wrote:
On 09/11/2011, at 16:56, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
On 09/11/2011, at 16:29, Kurt Touet wrote:
Is anyone else seeing problems like this with samba/zfs ? Perhaps
it's not exclusive to samba, either?
Yep, I see
On 09/11/2011, at 17:32, Garrett Cooper wrote
dd's of large files (spooled backups going to tape) to /dev/null are as slow
as Samba.
- Dedupe?
Nope.
- Compression?
On the mail spool ports, but not on the tape spool.
- How much RAM?
8GB.
- What debug options do you have
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Dan d...@sunsaturn.com wrote:
Updated from 9.0 beta3 to RC1 and using mkvmerge over samba/zfs
its taking over an hour to just mux in things like DTS english, where it was
15 minutes on beta3.
Hi Dan,
- Can you do more deterministic / scientific benchmarks
Updated from 9.0 beta3 to RC1 and using mkvmerge over samba/zfs
its taking over an hour to just mux in things like DTS english, where it
was 15 minutes on beta3.
Dan.
-
Dan The Man
CTO/ Senior System Administrator
Websites, Domains and Everything else
http
20 matches
Mail list logo
