Very interesting stats -- thanks for taking the time and trouble to share them!
One thing I found interesting is that the Gen 2 X25-M has higher write IOPS than the X25-E according to Intel's documentation (6,600 IOPS for 4K writes versus 3,300 IOPS for 4K writes on the "E"). I wonder if it'd perform better as a ZIL? (The write latency on both drives is the same). -marc On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 6:43 PM, Peter Radig <pe...@radig.de> wrote: > I was interested in the impact the type of an SSD has on the performance of > the ZIL. So I did some benchmarking and just want to share the results. > > My test case is simply untarring the latest ON source (528 MB, 53k files) > on an Linux system that has a ZFS file system mounted via NFS over gigabit > ethernet. > > I got the following results: > - locally on the Solaris box: 30 sec > - remotely with no dedicated ZIL device: 36 min 37 sec (factor 73 compared > to local) > - remotely with ZIL disabled: 1 min 54 sec (factor 3.8 compared to local) > - remotely with a OCZ VERTEX SATA II 120 GB as ZIL device: 14 min 40 sec > (factor 29.3 compared to local) > - remotely with an Intel X25-E 32 GB as ZIL device: 3 min 11 sec (factor > 6.4 compared to local) > > So it really makes a difference what type of SSD you use for your ZIL > device. I was expecting a good performance from the X25-E, but was really > suprised that it is that good (only 1.7 times slower than it takes with ZIL > completely disabled). So I will use the X25-E as ZIL device on my box and > will not consider disabling ZIL at all to improve NFS performance. > > -- Peter > -- > This message posted from opensolaris.org > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss >
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
