On 29 April, 2010 - Richard Elling sent me these 2,5K bytes: > >> With these lower numbers, our pool is much more responsive over NFS.. > > > > But taking snapshots is quite bad.. A single recursive snapshot over > > ~800 filesystems took about 45 minutes, with NFS operations taking 5-10 > > seconds.. Snapshots usually take 10-30 seconds.. > > > >> scrub: scrub in progress for 0h40m, 0.10% done, 697h29m to go > > > > scrub: scrub in progress for 1h41m, 2.10% done, 78h35m to go > > > > This is chugging along.. > > > > The server is a Fujitsu RX300 with a Quad Xeon 1.6GHz, 6G ram, 8x400G > > SATA through a U320SCSI<->SATA box - Infortrend A08U-G1410, Sol10u8. > > slow disks == poor performance
I know they're not "fast", but they're not "should take 10-30 seconds to create a directory". They do perfectly well in all combinations, except when a scrub comes along (or sometimes when a snapshot feels like taking 45 minutes instead of 4.5 seconds). iostat says the disks aren't 100% busy, the storage box itself doesn't seem to be busy, yet with zfs they go downhill in some conditions.. > > Should have enough oompf, but when you combine snapshot with a > > scrub/resilver, sync performance gets abysmal.. Should probably try > > adding a ZIL when u9 comes, so we can remove it again if performance > > goes crap. > > A separate log will not help. Try faster disks. /Tomas -- Tomas Ögren, st...@acc.umu.se, http://www.acc.umu.se/~stric/ |- Student at Computing Science, University of Umeå `- Sysadmin at {cs,acc}.umu.se _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
