Re: [zfs-discuss] Lower latency ZIL Option?: SSD behind Controller BB Write Cache

2011-01-29 Thread Edward Ned Harvey
From: Deano [mailto:de...@rattie.demon.co.uk] Hi Edward, Do you have a source for the 8KiB block size data? whilst we can't avoid the SSD controller in theory we can change the smallest size we present to the SSD to 8KiB fairly easily... I wonder if that would help the controller do a

Re: [zfs-discuss] Lower latency ZIL Option?: SSD behind Controller BB Write Cache

2011-01-28 Thread Edward Ned Harvey
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Eff Norwood We tried all combinations of OCZ SSDs including their PCI based SSDs and they do NOT work as a ZIL. After a very short time performance degrades horribly and for the OCZ drives

Re: [zfs-discuss] Lower latency ZIL Option?: SSD behind Controller BB Write Cache

2011-01-28 Thread Deano
...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Edward Ned Harvey Sent: 28 January 2011 13:25 To: 'Eff Norwood'; zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Lower latency ZIL Option?: SSD behind Controller BB Write Cache From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- boun...@opensolaris.org

Re: [zfs-discuss] Lower latency ZIL Option?: SSD behind Controller BB Write Cache

2011-01-28 Thread taemun
Comments below. On 29 January 2011 00:25, Edward Ned Harvey opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensola...@nedharvey.com wrote: This was something interesting I found recently. Apparently for flash manufacturers, flash hard drives are like the pimple on the butt of the elephant. A vast majority of

Re: [zfs-discuss] Lower latency ZIL Option?: SSD behind Controller BB Write Cache

2011-01-28 Thread Eric D. Mudama
On Fri, Jan 28 at 8:25, Edward Ned Harvey wrote: From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Eff Norwood We tried all combinations of OCZ SSDs including their PCI based SSDs and they do NOT work as a ZIL. After a very short time

Re: [zfs-discuss] Lower latency ZIL Option?: SSD behind Controller BB Write Cache

2011-01-27 Thread Eff Norwood
We tried all combinations of OCZ SSDs including their PCI based SSDs and they do NOT work as a ZIL. After a very short time performance degrades horribly and for the OCZ drives they eventually fail completely. We also tried Intel which performed a little better and didn't flat out fail over

Re: [zfs-discuss] Lower latency ZIL Option?: SSD behind Controller BB Write Cache

2011-01-27 Thread James
Chris Eff, Thanks for your expertise on this and other posts. Greatly appreciated. I've just been re-reading some of the great SSD-as-ZIL discussions. Chris, Cost: Our case is a bit non-representative as we have spare P410/512's that came with ESXi hosts (USB boot) so I've budgetted them at

Re: [zfs-discuss] Lower latency ZIL Option?: SSD behind Controller BB Write Cache

2011-01-27 Thread Eff Norwood
They have been incredibly reliable with zero downtime or issues. As a result, we use 2 in every system striped. For one application outside of VDI, we use a pair of them mirrored, but that is very unusual and driven by the customer and not us. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org

[zfs-discuss] Lower latency ZIL Option?: SSD behind Controller BB Write Cache

2011-01-26 Thread James
I’m wondering if any of the ZIL gurus could examine the following and point out anywhere my logic is going wrong. For small backend systems (e.g. 24x10k SAS Raid 10) I’m expecting an absolute maximum backend write throughput of 1 seq IOPS** and more realistically 2000-5000. With

Re: [zfs-discuss] Lower latency ZIL Option?: SSD behind Controller BB Write Cache

2011-01-26 Thread Christopher George
ZIL OPTIONS: Obviously a DDRdrive is the ideal (36k 4k random IOPS***) but for the same budget I can get 2x Vertex 2 EX 50GB drives and put each behind it’s own P410 512MB BBWC controller. The Vertex 2 EX goes for approximately $900 each online, while the P410/512 BBWC is listed at HP for