James Lever wrote:
Hi Erik,
On 22/06/2009, at 1:15 PM, Erik Trimble wrote:
I just looked at pricing for the higher-end MLC devices, and it looks
like I'm better off getting a single drive of 2X capacity than two
with X capacity.
Leaving aside the issue that by using 2 drives I get 2 x 3.0Gbps
SATA performance instead of 1 x 3.0Gbps, are there problems with
using two slices instead of whole-drives? That is, one slice for
Read and the other for ZIL?
The benefit you will get using 2 drives instead of 1 will be doubling
your IOPS which will improve your overall performance, especially when
using those drives as ZILs.
Are you planning on using these drives as primary data storage and ZIL
for the same volumes or as primary storage for (say) your rpool and
ZIL for a data pool on spinning metal?
cheers,
James
ZIL and Read cache for a data pool of HDs.
i.e.
zpool create tank mirror c1t0d0 c1t1d0 [...] log c2t0d0 cache c3t0d0
or
zpool create tank mirror c1t0d0 c1t1d0 [...] log c2t0d0s0 cache c2t0d0s1
--
Erik Trimble
Java System Support
Mailstop: usca22-123
Phone: x17195
Santa Clara, CA
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
