similar to: Some basic questions about getting the best performance for database usage

Hi there. I just got a new Adaptec RAID 51645 controller in because the old (other type) was malfunctioning. It is paired with 16 Seagate 15k5 disks, of which two are used with hardware RAID 1 for OpenSolaris snv_98, and the rest is configured as striped mirrors as a zpool. I created a zfs filesystem on this pool with a blocksize of 8K. This server has 64GB of memory and will be running

I have some questions about the choice of SSDs to use for ZIL and L2ARC. I''m trying to build an OpenSolaris iSCSI SAN out of a whitebox system, which is intended to be used as a backup SAN during storage migration, so it''s built on a tight budget. The system currently has 4GB RAM, 3GHz Core2-Quad and 8x 500GB WD REII SATA HDDs attached to an Areca 8port ARC-1220 controller

HI, The question is a ZFS performance question in reguards to SAN traffic. We are trying to benchmark ZFS vx VxFS file systems and I get the following performance results. Test Setup: Solaris 10: 11/06 Dual port Qlogic HBA with SFCSM (for ZFS) and DMP (of VxFS) Sun Fire v490 server LSI Raid 3994 on backend ZFS Record Size: 128KB (default) VxFS Block Size: 8KB(default) The only thing

Well, I''ve searched my brains out and I can''t seem to find a reason for this. I''m getting bad to medium performance with my new test storage device. I''ve got 24 1.5T disks with 2 SSDs configured as a zil log device. I''m using the Areca raid controller, the driver being arcmsr. Quad core AMD with 16 gig of RAM OpenSolaris upgraded to snv_134. The zpool

Hi, for zfs raidz1, I know for random io, iops of a raidz1 vdev eqaul to one physical disk iops, since raidz1 is like raid5 , so is raid5 has same performance like raidz1? ie. random iops equal to one physical disk''s ipos. Regards Victor -- This message posted from opensolaris.org

Hi all, just after sending a message to sunmanagers I realized that my question should rather have gone here. So sunmanagers please excus ethe double post: I have inherited a X4140 (8 SAS slots) and have just setup the system with Solaris 10 09. I first setup the system on a mirrored pool over the first two disks pool: rpool state: ONLINE scrub: none requested config: NAME

Hello, I have a Dell 2950 with a Perc 5/i, two 300GB 15K SAS drives in a RAID0 array. I am considering going to ZFS and I would like to get some feedback about which situation would yield the highest performance: using the Perc 5/i to provide a hardware RAID0 that is presented as a single volume to OpenSolaris, or using the drives separately and creating the RAID0 with OpenSolaris and ZFS? Or

Hi, I read some articles on solarisinternals.com like "ZFS_Evil_Tuning_Guide" on http://www.solarisinternals.com/wiki/index.php/ZFS_Evil_Tuning_Guide . They clearly suggest to disable cache flush http://www.solarisinternals.com/wiki/index.php/ZFS_Evil_Tuning_Guide#FLUSH . It seems to be the only serious article on the net about this subject. Could someone here state on this

I have a lot of people whispering "zfs" in my virtual ear these days, and at the same time I have an irrational attachment to xfs based entirely on its lack of the 32000 subdirectory limit. I''m not afraid of ext4''s newness, since really a lot of that stuff has been in Lustre for years. So a-benchmarking I went. Results at the bottom:

Hello all, I am a complete newbie to OpenSolaris, and must to setup a ZFS NAS. I do have linux experience, but have never used ZFS. I have tried to install OpenSolaris Developer 134 on a 11TB HW RAID-5 virtual disk, but after the installation I can only use one 2TB disk, and I cannot partition the rest. I realize that maximum partition size is 2TB, but I guess the rest must be usable. For

for s10u2, documentation recommends 3 to 9 devices in raidz. what is the basis for this recommendation? i assume it is performance and not failure resilience, but i am just guessing... [i know, recommendation was intended for people who know their raid cold, so it needed no further explanation] thanks... oz -- ozan s. yigit | oz at somanetworks.com | 416 977 1414 x 1540 I have a hard time

apt-get update apt-clone upgrade Any first impressions? -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

Replacing my current media server with another larger capacity media server. Also switching over to solaris/zfs. Anyhow we have 24 drive capacity. These are for large sequential access (large media files) used by no more than 3 or 5 users at a time. I''m inquiring as to what the best configuration for this is for vdevs. I''m considering the following configurations 4 x x6

We are looking into the possibility of adding a dedicated ZIL and/or L2ARC devices to our pool. We are looking into getting 4 ? 32GB Intel X25-E SSD drives. Would this be a good solution to slow write speeds? We are currently sharing out different slices of the pool to windows servers using comstar and fibrechannel. We are currently getting around 300MB/sec performance with 70-100% disk busy.

Hi, I do have a disk array that is providing striped LUNs to my Solaris box. Hence I''d like to simply concat those LUNs without adding another layer of striping. Is this possibile with ZFS? As far as I understood, if I use zpool create myPool lun-1 lun-2 ... lun-n I will get a RAID0 striping where each data block is split across all "n" LUNs. If that''s

I have historically noticed that in ZFS, when ever there is a heavy writer to a pool via NFS, the reads can held back (basically paused). An example is a RAID10 pool of 6 disks, whereby a directory of files including some large 100+MB in size being written can cause other clients over NFS to pause for seconds (5-30 or so). This on B70 bits. I''ve gotten used to this behavior over NFS, but

hi all, I am hoping to move roughly 1TB of maildir format email to ZFS, but I am unsure of what the most appropriate disk configuration on a 3510 would be. based on the desired level of redundancy and usable space, my thought was to create a pool consisting of 2x RAID-Z vdevs (either double parity, or single parity with two hot-spares). using 300GB drives this would give roughly 2.4TB of usable

Hi all, I have a home server based on SNV_127 with 8 disks; 2 x 500GB mirrored root pool 6 x 1TB raidz2 data pool This server performs a few functions; NFS : for several ''lab'' ESX virtual machines NFS : mythtv storage (videos, music, recordings etc) Samba : for home directories for all networked PCs I backup the important data to external USB hdd each day. I previously had

This may not be a ZFS issue, so please bear with me! I have 4 internal drives that I have striped/mirrored with ZFS and have an application server which is reading/writing to hundreds of thousands of files on it, thousands of files @ a time. If 1 client uses the app server, the transaction (reading/writing to ~80 files) takes about 200 ms. If I have about 80 clients attempting it @ once, it can

[This email is either empty or too large to be displayed at this time]