Le 19 juil. 09 à 16:47, Bob Friesenhahn a écrit :
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009, Ross wrote:The success of any ZFS implementation is *very* dependent on the hardware you choose to run it on.To clarify:"The success of any filesystem implementation is *very* dependent on the hardware you choose to run it on."ZFS requires that the hardware cache sync works and is respected.
yes.
Without taking advantage of the drive caches, zfs would be considerably less performant.
That, I'm not so sure.When ZFS first came out, most pools were built on thumpers with a SATA device driver that did not handle NCQ concurrency. Enabling the write cache on a drive was a necessary way to have the drive firmware handle multiple request with small service times. Today we've got better device drivers but we've stopped comparing performance data with on/off settings on the disk write caches. The delta today might be a lot smaller than it used to be (and even less noticeable if one uses a slog on
SSD). -r
Bob -- Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, 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
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
