> So the 1 MB files are stored as ~8 x 128K recordsize. > > Because of > 5003563 use smaller "tail block" for last block of object > > The last block of you file is partially used. It will depend > on your filesize distribution by without that info we can > only guess that we're wasting an avg of 64K per file. Or 6%. > > If your distribution is such that most files are slightly > more than 1M, then we'd have 12% overhead from this effect. > > So using 16K/32K recordsize would quite possibly help as > files would be stored using ~ 64 x 16K blocks with an > overhead of < 1-2% (0.5 blocks wasted every 64).
I will (re)create the partition and modify the recordsize. I was unwilling to do so when I read the man page which discourages modifying this setting unless a database was used. Does zfs use suballocation if a file does not use an entire recordsize? If not the thumbnails probably wastes most space. They are approx. 4 KB. I'll be testing recordsizes from 1K and upwards. Actually 1K made zfs very slow but 2K seems fine. I'll report back when the entire partition has been copied. When I find the sweet spot I'll try to enable (default) compression. Thank you. -- regards Claus When lenity and cruelty play for a kingdom, the gentlest gamester is the soonest winner. Shakespeare _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
