>given that zfs always does copy-on-write for any updates, it's not clear >why this would necessarily degrade performance..
Writing should be no problem, as it is serialized... but when both database instances are reading a lot of different blocks at the same time, the spindles might "heat up". >If you want a full copy you can use zfs send/zfs receive -- either >within the same pool or between two different pools. Ok. But then again, it might be necessary to throttle zfs send/receive replication between pools. Otherwise the replication process might be influencing the production environment performance too much. Or is there already some kind of prioritization, that I have overlooked? //Mika # mv Disclaimer.txt /dev/null ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This message is intended for the addressee only and may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended receiver, any disclosure, copying to any person or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on this e-mail, is prohibited and may be un- lawful. You must therefore delete this e-mail. Internet communications may not be secure or error-free and may contain viruses. They may be subject to possible data corruption, accidental or on purpose. This e-mail is not and should not be construed as an offer or the solicitation of an offer to purchase or subscribe or sell or redeem any investments. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
