On Tue, 1 Jul 2008, Brian McBride wrote:
>
> Customer:
> I would like to know more about zfs's checksum feature.  I'm guessing
> it is something that is applied to the data and not the disks (as in
> raid-5).

Data and metadata.

> For performance reasons, I turned off checksum on our zfs filesystem
> (along with atime updates).  Because of a concern for possible data
> corruption (silent data corruption), I'm interested in turning checksum
> back on.  When I do so, will it create checksums for existing files or
> will they need to be rewritten?  And can you tell me the overhead
> involved with having checksum active (CPU time, additional space)?

Turning the checksums off only disables them for user data.  They are 
still enabled for filesystem metadata.  I doubt that checksums will be 
computed for existing files until a block is copied/modified, but 
perhaps scrub can do that (I don't know).  On modern AMD Opteron 
hardware it seems that CPU overhead for checksums is very low (e.g. < 
5%).

I don't see much value from disabling both atime and checksums in the 
fileysystem.  There is more value to disabling atime updates in NFS 
mounts.  Zfs is pretty lazy about updates so atime just adds slightly 
to total I/O but without noticeably increasing latency.

In a benchmark I did using iozone with 8k I/O blocks in ZFS 
filesystems with 128K block size, I see that with atime the random 
witers test results in 834.79 ops/sec but without it increases to 
853.56 ops/sec.  This is a very small performance improvement. 
Likewise, with checksums disabled (but atime enabled) I see 839.78 
ops/sec.  Using 8K I/O blocks in a filesystem with 8K block size 
resulted in a huge performance difference but unfortunately I failed 
to record the result.

Bob
======================================
Bob Friesenhahn
[EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
GraphicsMagick Maintainer,    http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/

_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Reply via email to