On 4/28/07, Yaniv Aknin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Following my previous post across several mailing lists regarding multi-tera
volumes with small files on them, I'd be glad if people could share real life
numbers on large filesystems and their experience with them. I'm slowly coming
to a realization that regardless of theoretical filesystem capabilities (1TB,
32TB, 256TB or more), more or less across the enterprise filesystem arena
people are recommending to keep practical filesystems up to 1TB in size, for
manageability and recoverability.
What's the maximum filesystem size you've used in production environment? How
did the experience come out?
Works fine. As an example:
Filesystem size used avail capacity Mounted on
xx 14T 116K 2.1T 1% /xx
xx/peter 14T 34G 2.1T 2% /xx/peter
xx/aa 14T 1.2T 2.1T 37% /xx/aa
xx/tank 14T 1.5T 2.1T 41% /xx/tank
xx/tank-archives 14T 3.5T 2.1T 63% /xx/tank-archives
xx/rework 14T 6.8G 2.1T 1% /xx/rework
xx/bb 14T 61G 2.1T 3% /xx/bb
xx/foo 14T 73K 2.1T 1% /xx/foo
xx/foo/aug06 14T 771K 2.1T 1% /xx/foo/aug06
xx/foo/cc 14T 55G 2.1T 3% /xx/foo/cc
xx/foo/mm 14T 2.2G 2.1T 1% /xx/foo/mm
xx/foo/dd 14T 47M 2.1T 1% /xx/foo/dd
xx/foo/rr 14T 1.4G 2.1T 1% /xx/foo/rr
xx/foo/tf 14T 1.6G 2.1T 1% /xx/foo/tf
xx/ee 14T 1.3T 2.1T 38% /xx/ee
xx/aa-fe 14T 274G 2.1T 12% /xx/aa-fe
xx/vv 14T 68G 2.1T 4% /xx/vv
xx/nn 14T 28G 2.1T 2% /xx/nn
xx/mm 14T 4.2G 2.1T 1% /xx/mm
xx/rr 14T 3.1G 2.1T 1% /xx/rr
xx/ss 14T 48G 2.1T 3% /xx/ss
xx/ff 14T 305G 2.1T 13% /xx/ff
xx/gg-jj 14T 570G 2.1T 21% /xx/gg-jj
xx/gg 14T 882G 2.1T 29% /xx/gg
xx/aa-tn 14T 35G 2.1T 2% /xx/aa-tn
xx/pp 14T 234K 2.1T 1% /xx/pp
xx/ee-tt 14T 256K 2.1T 1% /xx/ee-tt
xx/tank-r4 14T 2.0T 2.1T 50% /xx/tank-r4
xx/tank-r1-clone 14T 3.3T 2.1T 61% /xx/tank-r1-clone
xx/rdce 14T 91G 2.1T 5% /xx/rdce
That's a fair spread of sizes. Each filesystem in this
case represents a single dataset, so it's hard to make
them any smaller. (Until recently, some of the larger
datasets were spread across multiple ufs filesystems
and merged back together using an automount map.
At least zfs has saved me from that nightmare.)
Many of these filesystems have millions of files - the
most is over 11 million at an average of 115k each,
although one has 8 million at 4k each.
In practical terms, backing up much over a terabyte
in a single chunk isn't ideal. What I would like to see
here is more flexibility from something like Legato
in terms of defining schedules that would allow us to
back this up sensibly. (Basically, the changes are
relatively small, so it would be nice to use quarterly
schedules - Legato only really does weekly or monthly.)
--
-Peter Tribble
http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
