2011-07-12 9:06, Brandon High пишет:
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 7:03 AM, Eric Sproulespr...@omniti.com wrote:
Interesting-- what is the suspected impact of not having TRIM support?
There shouldn't be much, since zfs isn't changing data in place. Any
drive with reasonable garbage collection
2011-07-09 20:04, Edward Ned Harvey ?:
--- Performance gain:
Unfortunately there was only one area that I found any performance
gain. When you read back duplicate data that was previously written
with dedup, then you get a lot more cache hits, and as a result, the
reads go faster.
Hi Folks,
Situation :- x86 based solaris 11 express server with 2 pools (rpool / data)
got fried. I need to recover the raidz pool data which consists of 5 x 1tb
sata drives. Have individually checked disks with seagate diag tool, they are
all physically ok.
Issue :- new sandybridge based x86
Well, actually you've scored a hit on both ideas I had after reading the
question ;)
One more idea though: is it possible to change the disk controller mode in
BIOS i.e. to a generic IDE? Hopefully that might work, even if
sub-optimal...
AFAIK FreeBSD 8.x is limited to stable ZFSv15, and
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 6:18 PM, Jim Klimov jimkli...@cos.ru wrote:
2011-07-12 9:06, Brandon High пишет:
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 7:03 AM, Eric Sproulespr...@omniti.com wrote:
Interesting-- what is the suspected impact of not having TRIM support?
There shouldn't be much, since zfs isn't
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Jim Klimov
By the way, did you estimate how much is dedup's overhead
in terms of metadata blocks? For example it was often said
on the list that you shouldn't bother with dedup unless you
This dedup discussion (and my own bad expreience) have also
left me with another grim thought: some time ago sparse-root
zone support was ripped out of OpenSolaris.
Among the published rationales were transition to IPS and the
assumption that most people used them to save on disk space
(notion
You and I seem to have different interprettations of the
empirical 2x soft-requirement to make dedup worthwhile.
Well, until recently I had little interpretation for it at all, so your
approach may be better.
I hope that authors of the requirement statement would step
forward and explain
On Mon, 11 Jul 2011, Brett wrote:
1) to try freebsd as an alternative o/s hoping it has more recently
updated drivers to support the sata controllers. According to the
zfs wiki, freebsd 8.2 supports zpool version 28. I have a concern
that when i updated the old (fried) server to sol11exp it
Hi, we had a server that lost connection to fiber attached disk array where
data luns were housed, due to 3510 power fault. After connection restored alot
of the zpool status had these permanent errors listed as per below. I check the
files in question and as far as I could see they were
On Tue, 12 Jul 2011, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
You know what? A year ago I would have said dedup still wasn't stable
enough for production. Now I would say it's plenty stable enough... But it
needs performance enhancement before it's truly useful for most cases.
What has changed for you to
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 1:06 AM, Brandon High bh...@freaks.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 7:03 AM, Eric Sproul espr...@omniti.com wrote:
Interesting-- what is the suspected impact of not having TRIM support?
There shouldn't be much, since zfs isn't changing data in place. Any
drive with
On Tue, 12 Jul 2011, Eric Sproul wrote:
Now, others have hinted that certain controllers are better than
others in the absence of TRIM, but I don't see how GC could know what
blocks are available to be erased without information from the OS.
Drives which keep spare space in reserve (as any
I think high end SSDs, like those from Pliant, use a significant amount of
over allocation, and internal remapping and internal COW, so that they can
automatically garbage collect when they need to, without TRIM. This only works
if the drive has enough extra free space that it knows about
It is hard to say, 90% or 80%. SSD has already reserved overprovisioning places
for garbage collection and wear leveling. The OS level only knows file LBA, not
the physical LBA mapping to flash pages/block. Uberblock updates and COW from
ZFS will use a new page/block each time. A TRIM command
FYI - virtually all non-super-low-end SSDs are already significantly
over-provisioned, for GC and scratch use inside the controller.
In fact, the only difference between the OCZ extended models and the
non-extended models (e.g. Vertex 2 50G (OCZSSD2-2VTX50G) and Vertex 2
Extended 60G
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 7:41 AM, Eric Sproul espr...@omniti.com wrote:
But that's exactly the problem-- ZFS being copy-on-write will
eventually have written to all of the available LBA addresses on the
drive, regardless of how much live data exists. It's the rate of
change, in other words,
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 1:35 PM, Brandon High bh...@freaks.com wrote:
Most enterprise SSDs use something like 30% for spare area. So a
drive with 128MiB (base 2) of flash will have 100MB (base 10) of
available storage. A consumer level drive will have ~ 6% spare, or
128MiB of flash and 128MB
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Eric Sproul espr...@omniti.com wrote:
I see, thanks for that explanation. So finding drives that keep more
space in reserve is key to getting consistent performance under ZFS.
More spare area might give you more performance, but the big
difference is the
2011-07-12 23:14, Eric Sproul пишет:
So finding drives that keep more space in reserve is key to getting
consistent performance under ZFS.
I think I've read in a number of early SSD reviews
(possibly regarding Intel devices - not certain now)
that the vendor provided some low-level formatting
On 07/13/11 12:04 AM, Ciaran Cummins wrote:
Hi, we had a server that lost connection to fiber attached disk array where
data luns were housed, due to 3510 power fault. After connection restored alot
of the zpool status had these permanent errors listed as per below. I check the
files in
On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 11:16:02PM +0700, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 10:10 PM, Gary Mills mi...@cc.umanitoba.ca wrote:
The `lofiadm' man page describes how to export a file as a block
device and then use `mkfs -F pcfs' to create a FAT filesystem on it.
Can't I do the
I am now using S11E and a OCZ Vertex 3, 240GB SSD disk. I am using it in a SATA
2 port (not the new SATA 6gbps).
The PC seems to work better now, the worst lag is gone. For instance, I am
using Sunray, and if my girl friend is using the PC, and I am doing bit
torrenting, the PC could lock up
Gary Mills wrote:
On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 11:16:02PM +0700, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 10:10 PM, Gary Mills mi...@cc.umanitoba.ca wrote:
The `lofiadm' man page describes how to export a file as a block
device and then use `mkfs -F pcfs' to create a FAT filesystem
From: Bob Friesenhahn [mailto:bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us]
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 9:58 AM
You know what? A year ago I would have said dedup still wasn't stable
enough for production. Now I would say it's plenty stable enough...
But it
needs performance enhancement before it's
25 matches
Mail list logo
