Re: [zfs-discuss] iscsi/comstar performance

2009-10-19 Thread Jim Dunham
Frank Middleton wrote: On 10/13/09 18:35, Albert Chin wrote: Maybe this will help: http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/storage-discuss/2009-September/007118.html Well, it does seem to explain the scrub problem. I think it might also explain the slow boot and startup problem - the VM

Re: [zfs-discuss] iscsi/comstar performance

2009-10-18 Thread Frank Middleton
On 10/13/09 18:35, Albert Chin wrote: Maybe this will help: http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/storage-discuss/2009-September/007118.html Well, it does seem to explain the scrub problem. I think it might also explain the slow boot and startup problem - the VM only has 564M available,

[zfs-discuss] iscsi/comstar performance

2009-10-13 Thread Frank Middleton
After a recent upgrade to b124, decided to switch to COMSTAR for iscsi targets for VirtualBox hosted on AMD64 Fedora C10. Both target and initiator are running zfs under b124. This combination seems unbelievably slow compared to the old iscsi subsystem. A scrub of a local 20GB disk on the

Re: [zfs-discuss] iscsi/comstar performance

2009-10-13 Thread Albert Chin
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 01:00:35PM -0400, Frank Middleton wrote: After a recent upgrade to b124, decided to switch to COMSTAR for iscsi targets for VirtualBox hosted on AMD64 Fedora C10. Both target and initiator are running zfs under b124. This combination seems unbelievably slow compared to