On Wed, 23 Jul 2008, Tharindu Rukshan Bamunuarachchi wrote:

> 10,000 x 700 = 7MB per second ......
> 
> We have this rate for whole day ....
> 
> 10,000 orders per second is minimum requirments of modern day stock exchanges 
> ...
> 
> Cache still help us for ~1 hours, but after that who will help us ...
> 
> We are using 2540 for current testing ...
> I have tried same with 6140, but no significant improvement ... only one or 
> two hours ...

Does your application request synchronous file writes or use fsync()? 
While normally fsync() slows performance I think that it will also 
serve to even the write response since ZFS will not be buffering lots 
of unwritten data.  However, there may be buffered writes from other 
applications which gets written periodically and which may delay the 
writes from your critical application.  In this case reducing the ARC 
size may help so that the ZFS sync takes less time.

You could also run a script which executes 'sync' every second or two 
in order to convince ZFS to cache less unwritten data. This will cause 
a bit of a performance hit for the whole system though.

You 7MB per second is a very tiny write load so it is worthwhile 
investigating to see if there are other factors which are causing your 
storage system to not perform correctly.  The 2540 is capable of 
supporting writes at hundreds of MB per second.

As an example of "another factor", let's say that you used the 2540 to 
create 6 small LUNs and then put them into a ZFS zraid.  However, in 
this case the 2540 allocated all of the LUNs from the same disk (which 
it is happy to do by default) so now that disk is being severely 
thrashed since it is one disk rather than six.

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