search for: ddrdrive

The DDRdrive X1 OpenSolaris device driver is now complete, please join us in our first-ever ZFS Intent Log (ZIL) beta test program. A select number of X1s are available for loan, preferred candidates would have a validation background and/or a true passion for torturing new hardware/driver :-) We are singul...

I have a 24 x 1TB system being used as an NFS file server. Seagate SAS disks connected via an LSI 9211-8i SAS controller, disk layout 2 x 11 disk RAIDZ2 + 2 spares. I am using 2 x DDR Drive X1s as the ZIL. When we write anything to it, the writes are always very bursty like this: ool 488K 20.0T 0 0 0 0 xpool 488K 20.0T 0 0 0 0 xpool

My google-fu is coming up short on this one... I didn''t see that it had been discussed in a while ... What is the status of ZFS support for TRIM? For the pool in general... and... Specifically for the slog and/or cache??? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hi, as I have learned from the discussion about which SSD to use as ZIL drives, I stumbled across this article, that discusses short stroking for increasing IOPs on SAS and SATA drives: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/short-stroking-hdd,2157.html Now, I am wondering if using a mirror of such 15k SAS drives would be a good-enough fit for a ZIL on a zpool that is mainly used for file

Hi, I''ve ordered a new server with: - 4x600GB Toshiba 10K SAS2 Disks - 2x100GB OCZ DENEVA 2R SYNC eMLC SATA (no expander so I hope no SAS/ SATA problems). Specs: http://www.oczenterprise.com/ssd-products/deneva-2-r-sata-6g-2.5-emlc.html I want to use the 2 OCZ SSDs as mirrored intent log devices, but as the intent log needs quite a small amount of the disks (10GB?), I was wondering

What is the best way to tell if your bound by the number of individual operations per second / random io? "zpool iostat" has an "operations" column but this doesn''t really tell me if my disks are saturated. Traditional "iostat" doesn''t seem to be the greatest place to look when utilizing zfs. Thanks, Chris -------------- next part -------------- An

Hi!We''re trying to pinpoint our performance issues and we could use all the help to community can provide. We''re running the latest version of Nexenta on a pretty powerful machine (4x Xeon 7550, 256GB RAM, 12x 100GB Samsung SSDs for the cache, 50GB Samsung SSD for the ZIL, 10GbE on a dedicated switch, 11x pairs of 15K HDDs for the pool). We''re connecting a single Linux

What would the performance impact be of splitting up a 64 GB SSD into four partitions of 16 GB each versus having the entire SSD dedicated to each pool? Scenario A: 2 TB Mirror w/ 16 GB read cache partition 2 TB Mirror w/ 16 GB read cache partition 2 TB Mirror w/ 16 GB read cache partition 2 TB Mirror w/ 16 GB read cache partition versus Scenario B: 2 TB Mirror w/ 64 GB read cache SSD 2 TB

zdb -C shows an shift value on each vdev in my pool, I was just wondering if it is vdev specific, or pool wide. Google didn''t seem to know. I''m considering a mixed pool with some "advanced format" (4KB sector) drives, and some normal 512B sector drives, and was wondering if the ashift can be set per vdev, or only per pool. Theoretically, this would save me some size on

I recently got a new SSD (ocz vertex LE 50gb) It seems to work really well as a ZIL performance wise. My question is, how safe is it? I know it doesn''t have a supercap so lets'' say dataloss occurs....is it just dataloss or is it pool loss? also, does the fact that i have a UPS matter? the numbers i''m seeing are really nice....these are some nfs tar times before

Recently, I''ve been reading through the ZIL/slog discussion and have the impression that a lot of folks here are (like me) interested in getting a viable solution for a cheap, fast and reliable ZIL device. I think I can provide such a solution for about $200, but it involves a lot of development work. The basic idea: the main problem when using a HDD as a ZIL device are the cache flushes