On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 6:01 PM, Erik Trimble erik.trim...@oracle.com wrote:
I'd have to re-look at the exact numbers, but, I'd generally say that
2x6raidz2 vdevs would be better than either 1x12raidz3 or 4x3raidz1 (or
3x4raidz1, for a home server not looking for super-critical protection (in
On Tue, Jun 14 at 8:04, Paul Kraus wrote:
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 6:01 PM, Erik Trimble erik.trim...@oracle.com wrote:
I'd have to re-look at the exact numbers, but, I'd generally say that
2x6raidz2 vdevs would be better than either 1x12raidz3 or 4x3raidz1 (or
3x4raidz1, for a home server not
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 11:48 AM, Eric D. Mudama
edmud...@bounceswoosh.org wrote:
On Tue, Jun 14 at 8:04, Paul Kraus wrote:
I saw some stats a year or more ago that indicated the MTDL for raidZ2
was better than for a 2-way mirror. In order of best to worst I
remember the rankings as:
I can lay them out as 4*3-disk raidz1, 3*4-disk-raidz1
or a 1*12-disk raidz3 with nearly the same capacity (8-9
data disks plus parity). I see that with more vdevs the
IOPS will grow - does this translate to better resilver
and scrub times as well?
Yes it would translate in better resilver times
On 6/12/2011 5:08 AM, Dimitar Hadjiev wrote:
I can lay them out as 4*3-disk raidz1, 3*4-disk-raidz1
or a 1*12-disk raidz3 with nearly the same capacity (8-9
data disks plus parity). I see that with more vdevs the
IOPS will grow - does this translate to better resilver
and scrub times as well?
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 2:49 PM, Marty Scholes martyscho...@yahoo.com wrote:
For what it's worth, I ran a 22 disk home array as a single RAIDZ3 vdev
(19+3)for several
months and it was fine. These days I run a 32 disk array laid out as four
vdevs, each an
8 disk RAIDZ2, i.e. 4x 6+2.
Interesting, although makes sense ;)
Now, I wonder about reliability (with large 2-3Tb drives
and long scrub/resilver/replace times): say I have 12 drives
in my box.
I can lay them out as 4*3-disk raidz1, 3*4-disk-raidz1
or a 1*12-disk raidz3 with nearly the same capacity (8-9
data disks plus
And if the ZFS is supposedly smart enough to use request coalescing
as to minimize mechanical seek times, then it might actually be
possible that your disks would get stuck averagely serving
requests
from different parts of the platter, i.e. middle-inside and
middle-outside
and this
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Frank Van Damme
4 mirrors of 2 = sustained bandwidth of 4 disks
raidz2 with 8 disks = sustained bandwidth of 6 disks
Correction:
4 mirrors of 2 = sustained read bandwidth of 8 disks,
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Eugen Leitl
How bad would raidz2 do on mostly sequential writes and reads
(Athlon64 single-core, 4 GByte RAM, FreeBSD 8.2)?
The best way is to go is striping mirrored pools, right?
As far
2011/5/26 Eugen Leitl eu...@leitl.org:
How bad would raidz2 do on mostly sequential writes and reads
(Athlon64 single-core, 4 GByte RAM, FreeBSD 8.2)?
The best way is to go is striping mirrored pools, right?
I'm worried about losing the two wrong drives out of 8.
These are all 7200.11
2011-05-27 13:50, Frank Van Damme wrote:
Sequential? Let's suppose no spares.
4 mirrors of 2 = sustained bandwidth of 4 disks
raidz2 with 8 disks = sustained bandwidth of 6 disks
Well, technically, for reads the mirrors might get parallelized to read
different portions of data for separate
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 04:38:15PM +0400, Jim Klimov wrote:
And if the ZFS is supposedly smart enough to use request coalescing
as to minimize mechanical seek times, then it might actually be
possible that your disks would get stuck averagely serving requests
from different parts of the
2011/5/26 Eugen Leitl eu...@leitl.org:
How bad would raidz2 do on mostly sequential writes
and reads
(Athlon64 single-core, 4 GByte RAM, FreeBSD 8.2)?
The best way is to go is striping mirrored pools,
right?
I'm worried about losing the two wrong drives out
of 8.
These are all
How bad would raidz2 do on mostly sequential writes and reads
(Athlon64 single-core, 4 GByte RAM, FreeBSD 8.2)?
The best way is to go is striping mirrored pools, right?
I'm worried about losing the two wrong drives out of 8.
These are all 7200.11 Seagates, refurbished. I'd scrub
once a
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Eugen Leitl eu...@leitl.org wrote:
How bad would raidz2 do on mostly sequential writes and reads
(Athlon64 single-core, 4 GByte RAM, FreeBSD 8.2)?
I was using a similar but slightly higher spec setup (quad-core cpu
8 GB RAM) at home and didn't have any problems
On 05/27/11 04:34 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
How bad would raidz2 do on mostly sequential writes and reads
(Athlon64 single-core, 4 GByte RAM, FreeBSD 8.2)?
The best way is to go is striping mirrored pools, right?
I'm worried about losing the two wrong drives out of 8.
These are all 7200.11
17 matches
Mail list logo
