On Feb 14, 2010, at 6:45 PM, Thomas Burgess wrote:
>
> Whatever. Regardless of what you say, it does show:
>
> · Which is faster, raidz, or a stripe of mirrors?
>
> · How much does raidz2 hurt performance compared to raidz?
>
> · Which is faster, raidz, or hardware raid 5?
>
> · Is a mirror twice as fast as a single disk for reading? Is a 3-way
> mirror 3x faster? And so on?
>
>
> I’ve seen and heard many people stating answers to these questions, and my
> results (not yet complete) already answer these questions, and demonstrate
> that all the previous assertions were partial truths.
>
>
>
> I don't think he was complaining, i think he was sayign he dind't need you to
> run iosnoop on the old version of ZFS.
iosnoop runs fine on Solaris 10.
I am sorta complaining, though. If you wish to advance ZFS, then use the
latest bits. If you wish to discover the performance bugs in Solaris 10 that are
already fixed in OpenSolaris, then go ahead, be my guest. Examples of
improvements are:
+ intelligent prefetch algorithm is smarter
+ txg commit interval logic is improved
+ ZIL logic improved and added logbias property
+ stat() performance is improved
+ raidz write performance improved and raidz3 added
+ zfs caching improved
+ dedup changes touched many parts of ZFS
+ zfs_vdev_max_pending reduced and smarter
+ metaslab allocation improved
+ zfs write activity doesn't hog resource quite so much
+ a new scheduling class, SDC, added to better observe and manage
ZFS thread scheduling
+ buffers can be shared between file system modules (fewer copies)
As you can see, so much has changed, hopefully for the better, that running
performance benchmarks on old software just isn't very interesting.
NB. Oracle's Sun OpenStorage systems do not use Solaris 10 and if they did, they
would not be competitive in the market. The notion that OpenSolaris is worthless
and Solaris 10 rules is simply bull*
> Solaris 10 has a really old version of ZFS. i know there are some pretty big
> differences in zfs versions from my own non scientific benchmarks. It would
> make sense that people wouldn't be as interested in benchmarks of solaris 10
> ZFS seeing as there are literally hundreds scattered around the internet.
>
> I don't think he was telling you not to bother testing for your own purposes
> though.
Correct.
-- richard
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
