Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Performance as a function of Disk Slice

2007-07-09 Thread eric kustarz
> > However, I've one more question - do you guys think NCQ with short > stroked zones help or hurt performance? I have this feeling (my > gut, that is), that at a low queue depth it's a Great Win, whereas > at a deeper queue it would degrade performance more so than without > it. Any tho

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Performance as a function of Disk Slice

2007-07-08 Thread Scott Lovenberg
Thank you for your quick responses! I was unable to get back to this thread on account of being stuck on a motorcycle yesterday (still can't feel my legs!). I think the KISS principle applies to 95% of computing (keeping in mind that 90% of everything is crap ;)). I've read Relling's blogs wi

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Performance as a function of Disk Slice

2007-07-07 Thread Richard Elling
Scott Lovenberg wrote: > First Post! > Sorry, I had to get that out of the way to break the ice... Welcome! > I was wondering if it makes sense to zone ZFS pools by disk slice, and if it > makes a difference with RAIDZ. As I'm sure we're all aware, the end of a > drive is half as fast as the b

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Performance as a function of Disk Slice

2007-07-06 Thread Darren Dunham
> [...] ZFS gives me the ability to snapshot to archive (I assume it > works across pools?). No. Snapshots are only within a pool. Pools are independent storage arenas. -- Darren Dunham [EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Technical Consultant TAOS

[zfs-discuss] ZFS Performance as a function of Disk Slice

2007-07-06 Thread Scott Lovenberg
First Post! Sorry, I had to get that out of the way to break the ice... I was wondering if it makes sense to zone ZFS pools by disk slice, and if it makes a difference with RAIDZ. As I'm sure we're all aware, the end of a drive is half as fast as the beginning ([i]where the zoning stipulates th