On Jun 2, 2011, at 20:50, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
> Also, if you have an SSD for cache device, you accelerate reads, and there
> is absolutely no data risk. In the event of cache device failure,
> performance degrades back to the "normal" level and everything continues
> just fine.
Dropping bac
On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 09:59:39PM -0400, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
> > From: Daniel Carosone [mailto:d...@geek.com.au]
> > Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2011 9:03 PM
> >
> > Separately, with only 4G of RAM, i think an L2ARC is likely about a
> > wash, since L2ARC entries also consume RAM.
>
> True the
> From: Daniel Carosone [mailto:d...@geek.com.au]
> Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2011 9:03 PM
>
> Separately, with only 4G of RAM, i think an L2ARC is likely about a
> wash, since L2ARC entries also consume RAM.
True the L2ARC requires some ARC consumption to support it, but for typical
user data, it
Thanks, I like this summary format and the effort it took
to produce seems well-spent.
On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 08:50:58PM -0400, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
> > but I figured spending 500G on ZIL
> > would be unwise.
>
> You couldn't possibly ever use 500G of ZIL, because the ZIL is required to
>
> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
> boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Dave U.Random
>
> I am planning to revisit SSD again
> when the consumer drives are reliable enough and don't have wear issues.
> Right now overall integrity and long service life are more impo
Many thanks to all who responded. I learned a lot from this thread! For now
I have decided to make a 3 way mirror because of the read performance. I
don't want to take a risk on an unmirrored drive.
Instead of replying to everyone separately I am following the Sun Managers
system since I read that
