Anton, On 12/8/06 7:18 AM, "Anton B. Rang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If your database performance is dominated by sequential reads, ZFS may not be > the best solution from a performance perspective. Because ZFS uses a > write-anywhere layout, any database table which is being updated will quickly > become scattered on the disk, so that sequential read patterns become random > reads. This is not the case with ZFS, it writes in large sequential chunks like other FS. For the Sun data warehouse appliance, we use clusters of X4500 and each one sustains 1.7GB/s of sequential scan rate through the database. A cluster of ten sustains 17GB/s through the database. I would be surprised if the Sun data warehouse powered by Greenplum and using ZFS isn't over 100 times faster than the planned Oracle system mentioned in this thread and likely a lot cheaper. - Luke _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
