[zfs-discuss] VDI iops with caching
I am looking at the performance numbers for the Oracle VDI admin guide. http://docs.oracle.com/html/E26214_02/performance-storage.html From my calculations for 200 desktops running Windows 7 knowledge user (15 iops) with a 30-70 read/write split it comes to 5100 iops. Using 7200 rpm disks the requirement will be 68 disks. This doesn't seem right, because if you are using clones with caching, you should be able to easily satisfy your reads from ARC and L2ARC. As well, Oracle VDI by default caches writes; therefore the writes will be coalesced and there will be no ZIL activity. Anyone have other guidelines on what they are seeing for iops with vdi? Happy New Year! Geoff ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] poor CIFS and NFS performance
On Jan 2, 2013, at 2:03 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 10:40:39AM -0800, Richard Elling wrote: >> On Dec 30, 2012, at 9:02 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > >>> The system is a MSI E350DM-E33 with 8 GByte PC1333 DDR3 >>> memory, no ECC. All the systems have Intel NICs with mtu 9000 >>> enabled, including all switches in the path. >> >> Does it work faster with the default MTU? > > No, it was even slower, that's why I went from 1500 to 9000. > I estimate it brought ~20 MByte/s more peak on Windows 7 64 bit CIFS. OK, then you have something else very wrong in your network. >> Also check for retrans and errors, using the usual network performance >> debugging checks. > > Wireshark or tcpdump on Linux/Windows? What would > you suggest for OI? Look at all of the stats for all NICs and switches on both ends of each wire. Look for collisions (should be 0), drops (should be 0), dups (should be 0), retrans (should be near 0), flow control (server shouldn't see flow control activity), etc. There is considerable written material on how to diagnose network flakiness. > >>> P.S. Not sure whether this is pathological, but the system >>> does produce occasional soft errors like e.g. dmesg >> >> More likely these are due to SMART commands not being properly handled > > Otherwise napp-it attests full SMART support. > >> for SATA devices. They are harmless. Yep, this is a SATA/SAS/SMART interaction where assumptions are made that might not be true. Usually it means that the SMART probes are using SCSI commands on SATA disks. -- richard -- richard.ell...@richardelling.com +1-760-896-4422 ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] poor CIFS and NFS performance
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 10:40:39AM -0800, Richard Elling wrote: > On Dec 30, 2012, at 9:02 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > > The system is a MSI E350DM-E33 with 8 GByte PC1333 DDR3 > > memory, no ECC. All the systems have Intel NICs with mtu 9000 > > enabled, including all switches in the path. > > Does it work faster with the default MTU? No, it was even slower, that's why I went from 1500 to 9000. I estimate it brought ~20 MByte/s more peak on Windows 7 64 bit CIFS. > Also check for retrans and errors, using the usual network performance > debugging checks. Wireshark or tcpdump on Linux/Windows? What would you suggest for OI? > > P.S. Not sure whether this is pathological, but the system > > does produce occasional soft errors like e.g. dmesg > > More likely these are due to SMART commands not being properly handled Otherwise napp-it attests full SMART support. > for SATA devices. They are harmless. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
