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 performan
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
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 per
>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 an
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
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 pe
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
hav
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 6:54 AM, John Martin 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 HDS72303
Hitachi HDS72303
S
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 Z
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 interna
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 6:13 PM, Daniel Carosone 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) Seagate
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 29/05/2012 6:39 AM, Richard Elling wrote:
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 suggesti
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 d
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 6:48 AM, Nathan Kroenert 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
with consumer level
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
16 matches
Mail list logo
