Re: [zfs-discuss] Scrub performance

2013-02-04 Thread Edward Ned Harvey (opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensolaris)
> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- > boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Edward Ned Harvey > > I can tell you I've had terrible everything rates when I used dedup. So, the above comment isn't fair, really. The truth is here: http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zf

Re: [zfs-discuss] Scrub performance

2013-02-04 Thread Jim Klimov
On 2013-02-04 17:10, Karl Wagner wrote: OK then, I guess my next question would be what's the best way to "undedupe" the data I have? Would it work for me to zfs send/receive on the same pool (with dedup off), deleting the old datasets once they have been 'copied'? I think I remember reading som

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs + NFS + FreeBSD with performance prob

2013-02-04 Thread Paul Kraus
On Jan 31, 2013, at 5:16 PM, Albert Shih wrote: > Well I've server running FreeBSD 9.0 with (don't count / on differents > disks) zfs pool with 36 disk. > > The performance is very very good on the server. > > I've one NFS client running FreeBSD 8.3 and the performance over NFS is > very good :

Re: [zfs-discuss] Scrub performance

2013-02-04 Thread Koopmann, Jan-Peter
Hi, OK then, I guess my next question would be what's the best way to "undedupe" the data I have? Would it work for me to zfs send/receive on the same pool (with dedup off), deleting the old datasets once they have been 'copied'? yes. Worked for my. I think I remember reading somewhere that

Re: [zfs-discuss] Scrub performance

2013-02-04 Thread Karl Wagner
OK then, I guess my next question would be what's the best way to "undedupe" the data I have? Would it work for me to zfs send/receive on the same pool (with dedup off), deleting the old datasets once they have been 'copied'? I think I remember reading somewhere that the DDT never shrinks, so

Re: [zfs-discuss] Scrub performance

2013-02-04 Thread Jim Klimov
On 2013-02-04 15:52, Edward Ned Harvey (opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensolaris) wrote: I noticed that sometimes I had terrible rates with < 10MB/sec. Then later it rose up to < 70MB/sec. Are you talking about scrub rates for the complete scrub? Because if you sit there and watch it, from minute

Re: [zfs-discuss] Scrub performance

2013-02-04 Thread Koopmann, Jan-Peter
Hi Edward, From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Koopmann, Jan-Peter all I can tell you is that I've had terrible scrub rates when I used dedup. I can tell

Re: [zfs-discuss] Scrub performance

2013-02-04 Thread Edward Ned Harvey (opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensolaris)
> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- > boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Koopmann, Jan-Peter > > all I can tell you is that I've had terrible scrub rates when I used dedup. I can tell you I've had terrible everything rates when I used dedup. > The > DDT was a bi

Re: [zfs-discuss] Scrub performance

2013-02-04 Thread Koopmann, Jan-Peter
Hi Karl, Recently, however, it has started taking over 20hours to complete. Not much has happened to it in that time: A few extra files added, maybe a couple of deletions, but not a huge amount. I am finding it difficult to understand why performance would have dropped so dramatically. FYI th

[zfs-discuss] Scrub performance

2013-02-04 Thread Karl Wagner
Hi all I have had a ZFS file server for a while now. I recently upgraded it, giving it 16GB RAM and an SSD for L2ARC. This allowed me to evaluate dedupe on certain datasets, which worked pretty well. The main reason for the upgrade was that something wasn't working quite right, and I was get