On 3/2/16 5:08 PM, Matthew Ahrens wrote:
I'll read that as "please don't integrate without mirror removal
because it will entice people to run 'zpool detach' to reduce their
redundancy". Let me know if I've misinterpreted your (Ray and
ilovezfs) position.
I assume your concern about "total
On 3/2/16 9:56 AM, ilove zfs wrote:
I'd be concerned that this will lead a significant number of people to
total people loss when they start dismantling mirror vdevs in order to
be able to remove them, and then run without redundancy during the
course of the removal.
For mirrors, is exactly
>
>
>
> Must be nice to have that kind of HW. :)
>
> I wonder if it's the 40 cores (20 cores with HT, right?), or the faster
> clocks that are tickling things?
This sounds like lock contention problem on e5-4650l -- 64 vcores
J.
___
developer ma
