On 05/28/12 08:48, Nathan Kroenert wrote:
Looking to get some larger drives for one of my boxes. It runs
exclusively ZFS and has been using Seagate 2TB units up until now (which
are 512 byte sector).
Anyone offer up suggestions of either 3 or preferably 4TB drives that
actually work well with
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 6:54 AM, John Martin john.m.mar...@oracle.com wrote:
$ zdb -C | grep ashift
ashift: 12
ashift: 12
ashift: 12
That's interesting. I just created a raidz3 pool out of 7x3TB drives.
My drives were
ST3000DM001-9YN1
Hitachi
Hi John,
Actually, last time I tried the whole AF (4k) thing, it's performance
was worse than woeful.
But admittedly, that was a little while ago.
The drives were the seagate green barracuda IIRC, and performance for
just about everything was 20MB/s per spindle or worse, when it should
On 05/29/12 08:35, Nathan Kroenert wrote:
Hi John,
Actually, last time I tried the whole AF (4k) thing, it's performance
was worse than woeful.
But admittedly, that was a little while ago.
The drives were the seagate green barracuda IIRC, and performance for
just about everything was 20MB/s
On 05/29/12 07:26, bofh wrote:
ashift:9 is that standard?
Depends on what the drive reports as physical sector size.
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
The drives were the seagate green barracuda IIRC, and performance for
just about everything was 20MB/s per spindle or worse, when it should
have been closer to 100MB/s when streaming. Things were worse still when
doing random...
It is possible that your partitions weren't aligned at 4K and
2012-05-29 16:35, Nathan Kroenert wrote:
Hi John,
Actually, last time I tried the whole AF (4k) thing, it's performance
was worse than woeful.
But admittedly, that was a little while ago.
The drives were the seagate green barracuda IIRC, and performance for
just about everything was 20MB/s
On May 29, 2012, at 6:10 AM, Jim Klimov wrote:
Also note that ZFS IO often is random even for reads, since you
have to read metadata and file data often from different dispersed
locations.
This is true for almost all other file systems, too. For example, in UFS,
metadata is stored in fixed
On 29/05/2012 11:10 PM, Jim Klimov wrote:
2012-05-29 16:35, Nathan Kroenert wrote:
Hi John,
Actually, last time I tried the whole AF (4k) thing, it's performance
was worse than woeful.
But admittedly, that was a little while ago.
The drives were the seagate green barracuda IIRC, and
Hi folks,
Looking to get some larger drives for one of my boxes. It runs
exclusively ZFS and has been using Seagate 2TB units up until now (which
are 512 byte sector).
Anyone offer up suggestions of either 3 or preferably 4TB drives that
actually work well with ZFS out of the box? (And not
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 6:48 AM, Nathan Kroenert nat...@tuneunix.com wrote:
Anyone offer up suggestions of either 3 or preferably 4TB drives that
actually work well with ZFS out of the box? (And not perform like
rubbish)...
With our NCP 3 boxes the WD drives seem to be working okay (this is
On May 28, 2012, at 5:48 AM, Nathan Kroenert wrote:
Hi folks,
Looking to get some larger drives for one of my boxes. It runs exclusively
ZFS and has been using Seagate 2TB units up until now (which are 512 byte
sector).
Anyone offer up suggestions of either 3 or preferably 4TB drives
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 09:23:25AM -0600, Nigel W wrote:
After a snafu
last week at $work where a 512 byte pool would not resilver with a 4K
drive plugged in, it appears that (keep in mind that these are
consumer drives) Seagate no longer manufactures the 7200.12 series
drives which has a
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 6:13 PM, Daniel Carosone d...@geek.com.au wrote:
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 09:23:25AM -0600, Nigel W wrote:
After a snafu
last week at $work where a 512 byte pool would not resilver with a 4K
drive plugged in, it appears that (keep in mind that these are
consumer drives)
On 05/28/12 17:13, Daniel Carosone wrote:
There are two problems using ZFS on drives with 4k sectors:
1) if the drive lies and presents 512-byte sectors, and you don't
manually force ashift=12, then the emulation can be slow (and
possibly error prone). There is essentially an
15 matches
Mail list logo
