On 05/29/12 08:35, Nathan Kroenert wrote:
Hi John,

Actually, last time I tried the whole AF (4k) thing, it's performance
was worse than woeful.

But admittedly, that was a little while ago.

The drives were the seagate green barracuda IIRC, and performance for
just about everything was 20MB/s per spindle or worse, when it should
have been closer to 100MB/s when streaming. Things were worse still when
doing random...

I'm actually looking to put in something larger than the 3*2TB drives
(triple mirror for read perf) this pool has in it - preferably 3 * 4TB
drives. (I don't want to put in more spindles - just replace the current

I might just have to bite the bullet and try something with current SW. :).

Raw read from one of the mirrors:

#  timex dd if=/dev/rdsk/c0t2d0s2 of=/dev/null bs=1024000 count=10000
10000+0 records in
10000+0 records out

real          49.26
user           0.01
sys            0.27

filebench filemicro_seqread reports an impossibly high number (4GB/s)
so the ARC is likely handling all reads.

The label on the boxes I bought say:

  S/N: ...

The drives in the box were really
ST1000DM003-9YN162 with 64MB of cache.
I have multiple pools on each disk so the
cache should be disabled.  The drive reports
512 byte logical sectors and 4096 physical sectors.
zfs-discuss mailing list

Reply via email to