I believe Zpool iostat will include cached IO's, and write IO's which
will be coalesced into a single physical IO to your disk.

The plain "iostat" command is a good place to start to see what's
actually going to disk. "iostat -dxzcn 1" is what comes out my fingers
automatically, although I vary the interval, and often add "CM" the
options.

My number of "100" IOP/s per disk is a general number on what a SATA
drive can do, it's very much a rough guide. It's usually quite easy to
show in benchmarks that a given sata drive will do 150-200 or sometimes
even more, although generally such benchmarks only us a relatively small
portion of the disk, and so hide disk seek latencies. On a shared use
system, where the drive is likely to be 40-80% full, with "hot" data
spread all across the drive, those seek times really start to come back
into it.

In terms of IOP/s, disks really haven't gotten much faster at all over
the last 10 years. Bring on the flash revolution! :-)

T.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Roman
Naumenko
Sent: Friday, 21 August 2009 12:08 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [storage-discuss] Restricting initiator resource
consumption

> If your pool has few vdevs (I believe you had a single raid-z), then
this will be slow, as you will probably get only about 100 IOP/s from
your pool. My exchange server happily produces 1500 IOP/s in daily use,
and would go higher but our current array wont go any faster for
un-cached IO. :-)<p>

How do you check iops?</br>
I saw "writes" > 1000 in zpool iostat when I tested pool with sqlio over
iscsi.</br>

But it was async, of course.</br>
I didn't find a way to make sync synthetic writes on windows, so I'm
waiting fr exchange to see what kind of writes it makes.</br>
<p>
>>> Even with a dedicated SAN and 15K/rpm drives, MS generally recommend
>>> Raid-10 configurations for exchange. Raid-5/6, or RaidZ1/2 usually
>>> doesn't give the IOP/s rates you need - although many people do
anyway.<br>    <p>
>> That's why I'd like to use SSD - to improve iops to a desirable
level.  <p>
> Only if you get a reasonable cache hit rate. I suspect that a
combination of exchange and sql server is likely to result in a fairly
poor hit rate - certainly not enough to alleviate the performance
bottleneck of a single vdev.
<p>
I meant slog - to improve iops for wites. Reading cache is not a big
deal right now.

--<p>
Roman Naumenko</br>
[email protected]

Message was edited by: rokka
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
_______________________________________________
storage-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________
storage-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss

Reply via email to