On Wed, 5 May 2010, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
In the L2ARC (cache) there is no ability to mirror, because cache device
removal has always been supported. You can't mirror a cache device, because
you don't need it.
How do you know that I don't need it? The ability seems useful to me.
Bob
--
On 06 May, 2010 - Bob Friesenhahn sent me these 0,6K bytes:
On Wed, 5 May 2010, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
In the L2ARC (cache) there is no ability to mirror, because cache device
removal has always been supported. You can't mirror a cache device, because
you don't need it.
How do you know
On 06/05/2010 15:31, Tomas Ögren wrote:
On 06 May, 2010 - Bob Friesenhahn sent me these 0,6K bytes:
On Wed, 5 May 2010, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
In the L2ARC (cache) there is no ability to mirror, because cache device
removal has always been supported. You can't mirror a cache
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 8:47 PM, Michael Sullivan
michael.p.sulli...@mac.com wrote:
While it explains how to implement these, there is no information regarding
failure of a device in a striped L2ARC set of SSD's. I have been hard
pressed to find this information anywhere, short of testing it
Everyone,
Thanks for the help. I really appreciate it.
Well, I actually walked through the source code with an associate today and we
found out how things work by looking at the code.
It appears that L2ARC is just assigned in round-robin fashion. If a device
goes offline, then it goes to
Hi Michael,
What makes you think striping the SSDs would be faster than round-robin?
-marc
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Michael Sullivan michael.p.sulli...@mac.com
wrote:
Everyone,
Thanks for the help. I really appreciate it.
Well, I actually walked through the source code with an
Hi Marc,
Well, if you are striping over multiple devices the you I/O should be spread
over the devices and you should be reading them all simultaneously rather than
just accessing a single device. Traditional striping would give 1/n
performance improvement rather than 1/1 where n is the
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 1:18 AM, Edward Ned Harvey solar...@nedharvey.comwrote:
From the information I've been reading about the loss of a ZIL device,
What the heck? Didn't I just answer that question?
I know I said this is answered in ZFS Best Practices Guide.
On Fri, 7 May 2010, Michael Sullivan wrote:
Well, if you are striping over multiple devices the you I/O should be spread
over the devices and you
should be reading them all simultaneously rather than just accessing a single
device. Traditional
striping would give 1/n performance improvement
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Michael Sullivan
michael.p.sulli...@mac.com wrote:
The round-robin access I am referring to, is the way the L2ARC vdevs appear
to be accessed. So, any given object will be taken from a single device
rather than from several devices simultaneously, thereby
On 06/05/2010 19:08, Michael Sullivan wrote:
Hi Marc,
Well, if you are striping over multiple devices the you I/O should be
spread over the devices and you should be reading them all
simultaneously rather than just accessing a single device.
Traditional striping would give 1/n performance
On May 6, 2010, at 11:08 AM, Michael Sullivan wrote:
Well, if you are striping over multiple devices the you I/O should be spread
over the devices and you should be reading them all simultaneously rather
than just accessing a single device. Traditional striping would give 1/n
performance
On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 4:57 AM, Brandon High bh...@freaks.com wrote:
I believe that the L2ARC behaves the same as a pool with multiple
top-level vdevs. It's not typical striping, where every write goes to
all devices. Writes may go to only one device, or may avoid a device
entirely while using
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Michael Sullivan
I have a question I cannot seem to find an answer to.
Google for ZFS Best Practices Guide (on solarisinternals). I know this
answer is there.
I know if I set up ZIL on
Hi Ed,
Thanks for your answers. Seem to make sense, sort of…
On 6 May 2010, at 12:21 , Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Michael Sullivan
I have a question I cannot seem to find an answer to.
From: Michael Sullivan [mailto:michael.p.sulli...@mac.com]
My Google is very strong and I have the Best Practices Guide committed
to bookmark as well as most of it to memory.
While it explains how to implement these, there is no information
regarding failure of a device in a striped L2ARC
On 6 May 2010, at 13:18 , Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
From: Michael Sullivan [mailto:michael.p.sulli...@mac.com]
While it explains how to implement these, there is no information
regarding failure of a device in a striped L2ARC set of SSD's. I have
HI,
I have a question I cannot seem to find an answer to.
I know I can set up a stripe of L2ARC SSD's with say, 4 SSD's.
I know if I set up ZIL on SSD and the SSD goes bad, the the ZIL will be
relocated back to the spool. I'd probably have it mirrored anyway, just in
case. However you
On 05 May, 2010 - Michael Sullivan sent me these 0,9K bytes:
HI,
I have a question I cannot seem to find an answer to.
I know I can set up a stripe of L2ARC SSD's with say, 4 SSD's.
I know if I set up ZIL on SSD and the SSD goes bad, the the ZIL will
be relocated back to the spool.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 12:16 PM, Michael Sullivan
michael.p.sulli...@mac.com wrote:
I have a question I cannot seem to find an answer to.
I know I can set up a stripe of L2ARC SSD's with say, 4 SSD's.
I know if I set up ZIL on SSD and the SSD goes bad, the the ZIL will be
relocated back to
The L2ARC will continue to function.
-marc
On 5/4/10, Michael Sullivan michael.p.sulli...@mac.com wrote:
HI,
I have a question I cannot seem to find an answer to.
I know I can set up a stripe of L2ARC SSD's with say, 4 SSD's.
I know if I set up ZIL on SSD and the SSD goes bad, the the ZIL
Ok, thanks.
So, if I understand correctly, it will just remove the device from the VDEV and
continue to use the good ones in the stripe.
Mike
---
Michael Sullivan
michael.p.sulli...@me.com
http://www.kamiogi.net/
Japan Mobile: +81-80-3202-2599
US Phone: +1-561-283-2034
On 5
22 matches
Mail list logo
