Thank you mailinglist,
That was a lot of info. First of all, I don't think this is a cpu issue
since the cpu is mostly idle while copying.
Second, I tried the hacks in loader.conf and the other ones mentioned in the
beginning of the thread. Allthough perfomance is somewhat increased, it is
still
On 12/31/2010 6:47 PM, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Sat, Jan 01, 2011 at 10:33:43AM +1100, Peter Jeremy wrote:
Based on my experiences at home, I converted my desktop at work to
pure ZFS. The only issues I've run into have been programs that
extensively use mmap(2) - which is a known issue with
On Fri, 31 Dec 2010 15:47:47 -0800
Jeremy Chadwick free...@jdc.parodius.com wrote:
There's a link to www.dan.me.uk at the bottom of the above Wiki page
that outlines the madness that's required to configure the setup,
all of which has to be done by hand. I don't know many
administrators who
- Original Message -
From: Jeremy Chadwick free...@jdc.parodius.com
Based on my experiences at home, I converted my desktop at work to
pure ZFS. The only issues I've run into have been programs that
extensively use mmap(2) - which is a known issue with ZFS.
Is your ZFS root
On 2010-Dec-30 07:20:57 -0500, Dan Langille d...@langille.org wrote:
The reason I've not installed ZFS on root is because of the added
complications. I run the OS on ufs (with gmirror) and my data is on
ZFS. We must be hanging out with different groups. Most of the people
I know don't have
On Sat, Jan 01, 2011 at 10:33:43AM +1100, Peter Jeremy wrote:
On 2010-Dec-30 07:20:57 -0500, Dan Langille d...@langille.org wrote:
The reason I've not installed ZFS on root is because of the added
complications. I run the OS on ufs (with gmirror) and my data is on
ZFS. We must be hanging
On 2010-Dec-30 02:31:30 -0500, Adam Stylinski kungfujesu...@gmail.com wrote:
I can tell you what the problem is right now, actually. ZFS performs
very poorly on low performance CPUs (i.e. your Atom N330).
I would disagree. In this case, the op's most serious problem is a
bug in
On 2010-Dec-31 15:47:47 -0800, Jeremy Chadwick free...@jdc.parodius.com wrote:
Is your ZFS root filesystem associated with a pool that's mirrored or
using raidzX?
Currently, mirrored. I'm considering raidz1 at home. Note that my
work system is a single pool, whereas I'll use a separate pool for
I can tell you what the problem is right now, actually. ZFS performs very
poorly on low performance CPUs (i.e. your Atom N330). Try the same system with
a different CPU and you'll get a different result. It's not a lack of
bandwidth on your bus, memory, or disks, and it's not exactly the
On 30/12/2010 00:56, Dan Langille wrote:
them. You'll need to run both 'zpool update -a' and 'zfs update -a' --
As Jean-Yves pointed out: upgrade not update. Some word beginning with
'up' anyhow.
# gpart bootcode -b /boot/pmbr -p /boot/gptzfsboot -i 1 ad0
This part applies only if
On 12/30/2010 4:00 AM, Matthew Seaman wrote:
On 30/12/2010 00:56, Dan Langille wrote:
them. You'll need to run both 'zpool update -a' and 'zfs update -a' --
As Jean-Yves pointed out: upgrade not update. Some word beginning with
'up' anyhow.
# gpart bootcode -b /boot/pmbr -p
On 30/12/2010 12:20, Dan Langille wrote:
On 12/30/2010 4:00 AM, Matthew Seaman wrote:
On 30/12/2010 00:56, Dan Langille wrote:
Yes, if you're booting from ZFS and you're using gpt to partition the
disks, as described at http://wiki.freebsd.org/RootOnZFS/GPTZFSBoot/
et seq. That's probably
On 28/12/2010 23:56, Freek van Hemert wrote:
I have a question regarding zfs on freebsd.
(I'm making a home server)
This afternoon I did a zpool create data mirror ad4 ad6 Now I'm copying
things from my ufs2 disk into the 2TB zpool, it is very slow. I'm on freebsd
8.1 amd64 on an atom n330
Thanx for all the replies.
The hacks sounds good until 8.2 is released however, regarding this upgrade,
is the on-disk format the same? Can I just add the pool to a new install (of
8.2-RC) and expect higher performance? Or do I need to recreate the pool
with the newer versions of the utilities?
Guckux Freek
The hacks sounds good until 8.2 is released however, regarding this
upgrade,
is the on-disk format the same? Can I just add the pool to a new install
(of
8.2-RC) and expect higher performance? Or do I need to recreate the pool
with the newer versions of the utilities?
just do
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 11:55:57AM +0100, Stefan Huerter wrote:
Guckux Freek
The hacks sounds good until 8.2 is released however, regarding this
upgrade,
is the on-disk format the same? Can I just add the pool to a new install
(of
8.2-RC) and expect higher performance? Or do I need to
On 29/12/2010 08:57, Freek van Hemert wrote:
The hacks sounds good until 8.2 is released however, regarding this upgrade,
is the on-disk format the same? Can I just add the pool to a new install (of
8.2-RC) and expect higher performance? Or do I need to recreate the pool
with the newer
On Thursday, 30 December 2010, Matthew Seaman
m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk wrote:
No -- the on-disk format is different. ZFS will run fine with the older
on-disk formats, but you won't get the full benefits without updating
them. You'll need to run both 'zpool update -a' and 'zfs update
On 12/29/2010 12:47 PM, Matthew Seaman wrote:
On 29/12/2010 08:57, Freek van Hemert wrote:
The hacks sounds good until 8.2 is released however, regarding this upgrade,
is the on-disk format the same? Can I just add the pool to a new install (of
8.2-RC) and expect higher performance? Or do I
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 12:56:57AM +0100, Freek van Hemert wrote:
Hello everyone,
This is my first mail on the mailinglist and I very much appreciate this
option of getting some help.
I have a question regarding zfs on freebsd.
(I'm making a home server)
This afternoon I did a zpool
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 5:56 PM, Freek van Hemert fvhem...@gmail.comwrote:
Top tells me: 761 MB Active, 790 Inactive and there is hardly any cpu usage
(96-98% idle). vfs.numvnodes: around 12500 now (after several hours of
copying) and stil slowly rising.
Hope you can help me.
I believe
21 matches
Mail list logo
