Re: [zfs-discuss] drive speeds etc

2010-09-28 Thread Christian Kühnke
Hi,
the question is which WD Green drives you are using. WDxxEADS or WDxxEARS. The 
WDxxEARS have a 4k physical sector size instead of 512B. You need some special 
trickery to get the max performance out of them, probably even more so in a 
raidz configuration.

See 
http://www.solarismen.de/archives/4-Solaris-and-the-new-4K-Sector-Disks-e.g.-WDxxEARS-Part-1.html
 and the following parts.

Regards,
Christian
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


Re: [zfs-discuss] drive speeds etc

2010-09-28 Thread Fei Xu
I have both EVDS and EARS 2TB green drive.  And I have to say they are not good 
to build storage servers.

EVDS has compatibility issue with my supermicro appliance.  it will hang when 
doing huge data send or copy.  from IOSTAT I can see the data throughput is 
stuck on green disks with extremely high wait time.

for EARS drives, they are ok running opensolaris but veryvery poor performance 
handling small files.  I'm doing SVN via NFS share and it takes triple time CO 
a repository compare to NEtapp FAS960.  but the issue could be resolved by 
adding SSD as log device.  notice that, green disk seek time is 15ms and normal 
7200RPM disk is around 8.5ms.
I'll try the link provided by Christian to see if it can help the performance.

anyway, I've decided to use seagate 7200.11 which is big enough and fast.
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


Re: [zfs-discuss] drive speeds etc

2010-09-28 Thread Casper . Dik

I have both EVDS and EARS 2TB green drive.  And I have to say they are
not good to build storage servers.


I think both have native 4K sectors; as such, they balk or perform slowly
when a smaller I/O or an unaligned IOP hits them.

How are they formatted? Specifically, solaris slices must be aligned on a 
4K boundary or performance will stink.

Casper

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


Re: [zfs-discuss] drive speeds etc

2010-09-28 Thread Marty Scholes
Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote:
 device r/s w/s kr/s kw/s wait actv svc_t %w %b 
 cmdk0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 
 cmdk1 0.0 163.6 0.0 20603.7 1.6 0.5 12.9 24 24 
 fd0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 
 sd0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 
 sd1 0.5 140.3 0.3 2426.3 0.0 1.0 7.2 0 14 
 sd2 0.0 138.3 0.0 2476.3 0.0 1.5 10.6 0 18 
 sd3 0.0 303.9 0.0 2633.8 0.0 0.4 1.3 0 7 
 sd4 0.5 306.9 0.3 2555.8 0.0 0.4 1.2 0 7 
 sd5 1.0 308.5 0.5 2579.7 0.0 0.3 1.0 0 7 
 sd6 1.0 304.9 0.5 2352.1 0.0 0.3 1.1 1 7 
 sd7 1.0 298.9 0.5 2764.5 0.0 0.6 2.0 0 13 
 sd8 1.0 304.9 0.5 2400.8 0.0 0.3 0.9 0 6 

Something is going on with how these writes are ganged together.  The first two 
drives average 17KB per write and the other six 8.7KB per write.

The aggregate statistics listed show less of a disparity, but one still exists.

I have to wonder if there is some max transfer length type of setting on each 
drive which is different, allowing the Hitachi drives to allow larger 
transfers, resulting in fewer I/O operations, each having a longer service time.

Just to avoid confusion, the svc_t field it service time and not seek time. 
 The service time is the total time to service a request, including seek time, 
controller overhead, time for the data to transit the SATA bus and time to 
write the data.  If the requests are larger, all else being equal, the service 
time will ALWAYS be higher, but that does NOT imply the drive is slower.  On 
the contrary, it often implies a faster drive which can service more data per 
request.

At any rate, there is a reason that the Hitachi drives are handling larger 
requests than the WD drives.  I glanced at the code for a while but could not 
figure out where the max transfer size is determined or used.
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


Re: [zfs-discuss] drive speeds etc

2010-09-28 Thread Simon Breden
Regarding vdevs and mixing WD Green drives with other drives, you might find it 
interesting that WD itself does not recommend them for 'business critical' RAID 
use - this quoted from the WD20EARS page here 
(http://www.wdc.com/en/products/Products.asp?DriveID=773):

i
Desktop / Consumer RAID Environments - WD Caviar Green Hard Drives are tested 
and recommended for use in consumer-type RAID applications (i.e., Intel Matrix 
RAID technology).*

*Business Critical RAID Environments – WD Caviar Green Hard Drives are not 
recommended for and are not warranted for use in RAID environments utilizing 
Enterprise HBAs and/or expanders and in multi-bay chassis, as they are not 
designed for, nor tested in, these specific types of RAID applications. For all 
Business Critical RAID applications, please consider WD’s Enterprise Hard 
Drives that are specifically designed with RAID-specific, time-limited error 
recovery (TLER), are tested extensively in 24x7 RAID applications, and include 
features like enhanced RAFF technology and thermal extended burn-in testing.
/i

Further reading:
http://breden.org.uk/2009/05/01/home-fileserver-a-year-in-zfs/#drives
http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=121871tstart=0
http://jmlittle.blogspot.com/2010/03/wd-caviar-green-drives-and-zfs.html 
(mixing WD Green  Hitachi)
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


Re: [zfs-discuss] drive speeds etc

2010-09-28 Thread Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
- Original Message -
 Regarding vdevs and mixing WD Green drives with other drives, you
 might find it interesting that WD itself does not recommend them for
 'business critical' RAID use - this quoted from the WD20EARS page here
 (http://www.wdc.com/en/products/Products.asp?DriveID=773):

With TLER easily enabled on WD Black drives, I guess that's where we'll go. 
Anyway - this is a test box used for its purpose (testing), but it's still 
interesting to see these differences. Thanks for your input!

Vennlige hilsener / Best regards

roy
--
Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
(+47) 97542685
r...@karlsbakk.net
http://blogg.karlsbakk.net/
--
I all pedagogikk er det essensielt at pensum presenteres intelligibelt. Det er 
et elementært imperativ for alle pedagoger å unngå eksessiv anvendelse av 
idiomer med fremmed opprinnelse. I de fleste tilfeller eksisterer adekvate og 
relevante synonymer på norsk.
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


Re: [zfs-discuss] drive speeds etc

2010-09-28 Thread Miles Nordin
 sb == Simon Breden sbre...@gmail.com writes:

sb WD itself does not recommend them for 'business critical' RAID
sb use

The described problems with WD aren't okay for non-critical
development/backup/home use either.  The statement from WD is nothing
but an attempt to upsell you, to differentiate the market so they can
tap into the demand curve at multiple points, and to overload you with
information so the question becomes ``which WD drive should I buy''
instead of ``which manufactuer's drive should I buy.''  Don't let this
stuff get a foothold inside your brain.

``mixing'' drives within a stripe is a good idea because it protects
you from bad batches and bad models/firmwares, which are not rare in
recent experience!  I always mix drives and included WD in that mix up
until this latest rash of problems.  ``mixing'' is only bad (for WD)
because it makes it easier for you, the customer, to characterize the
green performance deficit and notice the firmware bugs that are unique
to the WD drives.


pgpg2mRMPLVGG.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


Re: [zfs-discuss] drive speeds etc

2010-09-28 Thread Simon Breden
IIRC the currently available WD Caviar Black models no longer enable TLER to be 
set. For WD drives, to have TLER capability you will need to buy their 
enterprise models like REx models which cost mucho $$$.
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


Re: [zfs-discuss] drive speeds etc

2010-09-28 Thread Simon Breden
 described problems with WD aren't okay for
  non-critical
 evelopment/backup/home use either.

Indeed. I don't use WD drives for RAID any longer.

  The statement
 from WD is nothing
 but an attempt to upsell you, to differentiate the
 market so they can
 tap into the demand curve at multiple points

Yes, I'm quite aware of this.


 Don't let this
 stuff get a foothold inside your brain.

Ok, thanks, I'll try to ensure that never happens :P

 ``mixing'' drives within a stripe is a good idea
 because it protects
 you from bad batches and bad models/firmwares, which
 are not rare in
 recent experience!

Yep, that's one way, although you also multiply the risk of at least one type 
of drive being a lemon.

Another is to research good drives  firmwares and stick with those. Twice out 
of two drive choosing/buying occasions, this latter choice has served me well. 
Zero read/write/checksum errors so far in almost 3 years. I must be lucky, very 
lucky :)

  I always mix drives and included
 WD in that mix up
 until this latest rash of problems.

I avoided WD (for RAID) as soon as these problems showed up and bought another 
manufacturer's drives.

I still buy their Caviar Black drives as scratch video editing drives though, 
as they're pretty good.
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


[zfs-discuss] drive speeds etc

2010-09-27 Thread Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
hi all

I just setup this test box on OI. It has a couple of X25Ms, 80GB and eight 2TB 
drives, two of them Hitachi Deskstar 7k2 drives and the other six WD Green. I 
have done some tests on this with mirrors to compare the performance and those 
tests conclude that the Hitachi drives are 25% or so faster. Now, installing a 
Bacula storage agent on the OI box, I see from iostat -xd that it looks like 
the WD Green drives are running in circles around the Deskstar drives. I really 
can't beleive why. Anyone here that has an idea of why this should be happening?

See below for iostat output.

2 second snap

 extended device statistics 
devicer/sw/s   kr/s   kw/s wait actv  svc_t  %w  %b 
cmdk0 0.00.00.00.0  0.0  0.00.0   0   0 
cmdk1 0.0  163.60.0 20603.7  1.6  0.5   12.9  24  24 
fd0   0.00.00.00.0  0.0  0.00.0   0   0 
sd0   0.00.00.00.0  0.0  0.00.0   0   0 
sd1   0.5  140.30.3 2426.3  0.0  1.07.2   0  14 
sd2   0.0  138.30.0 2476.3  0.0  1.5   10.6   0  18 
sd3   0.0  303.90.0 2633.8  0.0  0.41.3   0   7 
sd4   0.5  306.90.3 2555.8  0.0  0.41.2   0   7 
sd5   1.0  308.50.5 2579.7  0.0  0.31.0   0   7 
sd6   1.0  304.90.5 2352.1  0.0  0.31.1   1   7 
sd7   1.0  298.90.5 2764.5  0.0  0.62.0   0  13 
sd8   1.0  304.90.5 2400.8  0.0  0.30.9   0   6 

iostat -xd (with collected stats)

 extended device statistics 
devicer/sw/s   kr/s   kw/s wait actv  svc_t  %w  %b 
cmdk0 0.41.2   24.2   21.4  0.0  0.01.9   0   0 
cmdk1 0.15.73.7  709.6  0.1  0.0   12.5   1   1 
fd0   0.00.00.00.0  0.0  0.0  982.8   0   0 
sd0   0.00.00.00.0  0.0  0.00.0   0   0 
sd1   0.56.5   46.8  248.2  0.0  0.06.0   0   1 
sd2   0.56.5   46.5  248.2  0.0  0.06.0   0   1 
sd3   0.59.5   46.6  248.0  0.0  0.02.5   0   1 
sd4   0.59.5   46.6  248.0  0.0  0.02.5   0   1 
sd5   0.59.5   46.6  248.0  0.0  0.02.6   0   1 
sd6   0.59.5   46.5  248.0  0.0  0.02.5   0   1 
sd7   0.59.5   46.6  248.0  0.0  0.02.6   0   1 
sd8   0.59.5   46.6  248.0  0.0  0.02.5   0   1 

Vennlige hilsener / Best regards

roy
--
Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
(+47) 97542685
r...@karlsbakk.net
http://blogg.karlsbakk.net/
--
I all pedagogikk er det essensielt at pensum presenteres intelligibelt. Det er 
et elementært imperativ for alle pedagoger å unngå eksessiv anvendelse av 
idiomer med fremmed opprinnelse. I de fleste tilfeller eksisterer adekvate og 
relevante synonymer på norsk.
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


Re: [zfs-discuss] drive speeds etc

2010-09-27 Thread Marty Scholes
Is this a sector size issue?

I see two of the disks each doing the same amount of work in roughly half the 
I/O operations each operation taking about twice the time compared to each of 
the remaining six drives.

I know nothing about either drive, but I wonder if one type of drive has twice 
the sector size of the other?
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


Re: [zfs-discuss] drive speeds etc

2010-09-27 Thread Edward Ned Harvey
 From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
 boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk

  extended device statistics
 devicer/sw/s   kr/s   kw/s wait actv  svc_t  %w  %b
 sd1   0.5  140.30.3 2426.3  0.0  1.07.2   0  14
 sd2   0.0  138.30.0 2476.3  0.0  1.5   10.6   0  18
 sd3   0.0  303.90.0 2633.8  0.0  0.41.3   0   7
 sd4   0.5  306.90.3 2555.8  0.0  0.41.2   0   7
 sd5   1.0  308.50.5 2579.7  0.0  0.31.0   0   7
 sd6   1.0  304.90.5 2352.1  0.0  0.31.1   1   7
 sd7   1.0  298.90.5 2764.5  0.0  0.62.0   0  13
 sd8   1.0  304.90.5 2400.8  0.0  0.30.9   0   6

Unless I'm misunderstanding this output...
It looks like all disks are doing approx the same data throughput.
It looks like sd1  sd2 are doing half the IOPS.

So sd1  sd2 must be doing larger chunks.  How are these drives configured?  
One vdev of raidz2?  No cache/log devices, etc...

It would be easy to explain, if you're striping mirrors.  Difficult (at least 
for me) to explain if you're using raidzN.

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


Re: [zfs-discuss] drive speeds etc

2010-09-27 Thread Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
   extended device statistics
  device r/s w/s kr/s kw/s wait actv svc_t %w %b
  sd1 0.5 140.3 0.3 2426.3 0.0 1.0 7.2 0 14
  sd2 0.0 138.3 0.0 2476.3 0.0 1.5 10.6 0 18
  sd3 0.0 303.9 0.0 2633.8 0.0 0.4 1.3 0 7
  sd4 0.5 306.9 0.3 2555.8 0.0 0.4 1.2 0 7
  sd5 1.0 308.5 0.5 2579.7 0.0 0.3 1.0 0 7
  sd6 1.0 304.9 0.5 2352.1 0.0 0.3 1.1 1 7
  sd7 1.0 298.9 0.5 2764.5 0.0 0.6 2.0 0 13
  sd8 1.0 304.9 0.5 2400.8 0.0 0.3 0.9 0 6
 
 Unless I'm misunderstanding this output...
 It looks like all disks are doing approx the same data throughput.
 It looks like sd1  sd2 are doing half the IOPS.
 
 So sd1  sd2 must be doing larger chunks. How are these drives
 configured? One vdev of raidz2? No cache/log devices, etc...
 
 It would be easy to explain, if you're striping mirrors. Difficult (at
 least for me) to explain if you're using raidzN.

It's a raidz2 pool with eight drives, the first two are Hitachi 7k2 deskstar 
drives, the other 6 are WD Green drives. They are all 2TB  and there is a 
separate device used for L2ARC, an 80GB x25m.

r...@mime:/home/roy$ /usr/sbin/zpool status
  pool: mimedata
 state: ONLINE
 scan: none requested
config:

NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM
mimedataONLINE   0 0 0
  raidz2-0  ONLINE   0 0 0
c4t0d0  ONLINE   0 0 0
c4t1d0  ONLINE   0 0 0
c4t2d0  ONLINE   0 0 0
c4t3d0  ONLINE   0 0 0
c4t4d0  ONLINE   0 0 0
c4t5d0  ONLINE   0 0 0
c4t6d0  ONLINE   0 0 0
c4t7d0  ONLINE   0 0 0
cache
  c7d0  ONLINE   0 0 0

errors: No known data errors


-- 
Vennlige hilsener / Best regards

roy
--
Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
(+47) 97542685
r...@karlsbakk.net
http://blogg.karlsbakk.net/
--
I all pedagogikk er det essensielt at pensum presenteres intelligibelt. Det er 
et elementært imperativ for alle pedagoger å unngå eksessiv anvendelse av 
idiomer med fremmed opprinnelse. I de fleste tilfeller eksisterer adekvate og 
relevante synonymer på norsk.
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss