Ivan Voras wrote:
gnu...@alltel.blackberry.com wrote:
I can send in more documentation later but I am seeing severe zfs
performance issues with lighttpd. Same machine using UFS will push
1gbit or more but same content and traffic load can not hit 200mbit.
Ufs does around 3 megabytes/sec IO at 800mbit network but zfs pushes
the disks into the ground with 50+ megabytes/sec dusk i/o. No
compression no atime no checksums on zfs and still same IO levels. Ufs
with soft updates and atime on. Orders of magnitude more disk IO...
Like zfs isn't using cache or isn't coalescing disk reads or both.
Has anyone else seen this or have any recommendations? Lighttpd config
remains exactly the same as well FYI. Only difference is ufs vs zfs.
AFAIK, ZFS is incompatible (currently) with some advanced VM operations
(like mmap, and I think sendfile relies on the same mechanism as mmap),
so that could be a cause of the slowdown. Though I'm surprised you can
only get 200 MBit/s - that's 25 MB/s and I think that even with multiple
memcpy-ing data around the kernel you should be able to get hundreds of
MB/s on newer hardware (which normally really can achieve tens of
gigabytes/s of sustained memory access).
I have more strange issue with Lighttpd in jail on top of ZFS. Lighttpd
is serving static content (mp3 downloads thru flash player). Is runs
fine for relatively small number of parallel clients with bandwidth
about 30 Mbps, but after some number of clients is reached (about 50-60
parallel clients) the throughput drops down to 6 Mbps.
I can server hundereds of clients on same HW using Lighttpd not in jail
and UFS2 with gjournal instead of ZFS reaching 100 Mbps (maybe more).
I don't know if it is ZFS or Jail issue.
Miroslav Lachman
_______________________________________________
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
