> On Aug 18, 2009, at 10:47 AM, Roman Naumenko <no- > [email protected]> wrote: > > >> Using mirrors just makes zfs useless. The whole > idea > >> is a reliable raid6 storage with snapshots > >> features.<br> > >> The question is how prevent saturation for one > >> volume.</blockquote><div> > >> <br>What is your current > >> zpool format (raidz, raidz2, etc)? Using a mirror > >> does not make zfs useless - you can still use all > of > >> the built-in features of the software. Mirroring > your > >> drives just makes it a raid1 instead of raid6.<br> > > > > raidz2 array of 8 disks, 2Xquade core, 16G > > > > Yes, it's possible to configure it as 4x2 mirrors > with capacity > > almost 2 time less, with reliability also degraded. > But since they > > on the same controller, performance of one pool > might be dependent > > on access to another. > > Roman, > > That config will not handle exchange db well as it > will have the max > IOPS of a single disk because raidz/raidz2 has to > write the whole > stripe width in each write. > > I would seriously re-think your configuration or go > with a hardware > RAID solution.
I would like to have any major SAN in place for exchange: just put it there and forget, instead of dancing with zfs. Unfortunately, not within the current budget. But since zfs has more features, better reliability than typical vendor's NAS/SAN appliance and it "free", we are going with it. Well, performance, yes. I'm personally just waiting for the slog bug to be fixed IBM already did a great job bringing 250$ SSD on the market. -- Roman -- Roman -- This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ storage-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss
