I've also suggested this in the past, but I think the end result was that it
was pointless:
If you have sync writes, the client does not get a reply until the data is on
disk. So a SSD drive makes a huge difference.
If you have async writes, the client gets a reply as soon as the server has
True, but the ZIL is designed to only hold a small amount of data anyway, so
I'm not sure the cost of the ZIL device would be less than the equivalent RAM
for the sizes we're talking about.
There may be a few cases that would benefit, but I don't think there are enough
that Sun would put the
On Tue, 30 Jun 2009, John Hoogerdijk wrote:
i've setup a RAIDZ2 pool with 5 SATA drives and added a 32GB SSD log
device. to see how well it works, i ran bonnie++, but never saw any
io's on the log device (using iostat -nxce) . pool status is good - no
issues or errors. any ideas?
Try
On Wed, 1 Jul 2009, Mark J Musante wrote:
On Tue, 30 Jun 2009, John Hoogerdijk wrote:
i've setup a RAIDZ2 pool with 5 SATA drives and added a 32GB SSD log
device. to see how well it works, i ran bonnie++, but never saw any io's
on the log device (using iostat -nxce) . pool status is good -
Mark J Musante wrote:
On Tue, 30 Jun 2009, John Hoogerdijk wrote:
i've setup a RAIDZ2 pool with 5 SATA drives and added a 32GB SSD log
device. to see how well it works, i ran bonnie++, but never saw any
io's on the log device (using iostat -nxce) . pool status is good -
no issues or
John Hoogerdijk wrote:
so i guess there is some porting to do - no O_DIRECT in solaris...
anyone have bonnie++ 1.03e ported already?
For your purposes, couldn't you replace O_DIRECT with O_SYNC as a hack?
If you're trying to benchmark the log device, the important thing is to
generate
