On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 03:05:32PM +1100, Daniel Carosone wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 08, 2012 at 06:25:05PM -0800, Richard Elling wrote:
> > ZIL makes zero impact on resilver.  I'll have to check to see if L2ARC is 
> > still used, but
> > due to the nature of the ARC design, read-once workloads like backup or 
> > resilver do 
> > not tend to negatively impact frequently used data.
> This is true, in a strict sense (they don't help resilver itself) but
> it misses the point. They (can) help the system, when resilver is
> underway. 
> ZIL helps reduce the impact busy resilvering disks have on other system

Well, since I'm being strict and picky, I should of course say ZIL-on-slog.

> operation (sync write syscalls and vfs ops by apps).  L2ARC, likewise
> for reads.  Both can hide the latency increases that resilvering iops
> cause for the disks (and which the throttle you mentioned also
> attempts to minimise). 


Attachment: pgpJr64AafDRB.pgp
Description: PGP signature

zfs-discuss mailing list

Reply via email to