Hi Richard,
Richard Elling wrote:
> Since you are reading, it depends on where the data was written.
> Remember, ZFS dynamic striping != RAID-0.
> I would expect something like this if the pool was expanded at some
> point in time.
No, the RAID was set-up in one go right after jumpstarting the box.
>> (2) The disks should be able to perform much much faster than they
>> currently output data at, I believe it;s 2008 and not 1995.
>>
>
> X4500? Those disks are good for about 75-80 random iops,
> which seems to be about what they are delivering. The dtrace
> tool, iopattern, will show the random/sequential nature of the
> workload.
>
I need to read about his a bit and will try to analyze it.
>> (3) The four cores of the X4500 are dying of boredom, i.e. idle >95% all
>> the time.
>>
>> Has anyone a good idea, where the bottleneck could be? I'm running out
>> of ideas.
>>
>
> I would suspect the disks. 30 second samples are not very useful
> to try and debug such things -- even 1 second samples can be
> too coarse. But you should take a look at 1 second samples
> to see if there is a consistent I/O workload.
> -- richard
>
Without doing too much statistics (yet, if needed I can easily do that)
it looks like these:
capacity operations bandwidth
pool used avail read write read write
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
atlashome 3.54T 17.3T 256 0 7.97M 0
raidz2 833G 6.00T 0 0 0 0
c0t0d0 - - 0 0 0 0
c1t0d0 - - 0 0 0 0
c4t0d0 - - 0 0 0 0
c6t0d0 - - 0 0 0 0
c7t0d0 - - 0 0 0 0
c0t1d0 - - 0 0 0 0
c1t1d0 - - 0 0 0 0
c4t1d0 - - 0 0 0 0
c5t1d0 - - 0 0 0 0
c6t1d0 - - 0 0 0 0
c7t1d0 - - 0 0 0 0
c0t2d0 - - 0 0 0 0
c1t2d0 - - 0 0 0 0
c4t2d0 - - 0 0 0 0
c5t2d0 - - 0 0 0 0
raidz2 1.29T 5.52T 133 0 4.14M 0
c6t2d0 - - 117 0 285K 0
c7t2d0 - - 114 0 279K 0
c0t3d0 - - 106 0 261K 0
c1t3d0 - - 114 0 282K 0
c4t3d0 - - 118 0 294K 0
c5t3d0 - - 125 0 308K 0
c6t3d0 - - 126 0 311K 0
c7t3d0 - - 118 0 293K 0
c0t4d0 - - 119 0 295K 0
c1t4d0 - - 120 0 298K 0
c4t4d0 - - 120 0 291K 0
c6t4d0 - - 106 0 257K 0
c7t4d0 - - 96 0 236K 0
c0t5d0 - - 109 0 267K 0
c1t5d0 - - 114 0 282K 0
raidz2 1.43T 5.82T 123 0 3.83M 0
c4t5d0 - - 108 0 242K 0
c5t5d0 - - 104 0 236K 0
c6t5d0 - - 104 0 239K 0
c7t5d0 - - 107 0 245K 0
c0t6d0 - - 108 0 248K 0
c1t6d0 - - 106 0 245K 0
c4t6d0 - - 108 0 250K 0
c5t6d0 - - 112 0 258K 0
c6t6d0 - - 114 0 261K 0
c7t6d0 - - 110 0 253K 0
c0t7d0 - - 109 0 248K 0
c1t7d0 - - 109 0 246K 0
c4t7d0 - - 108 0 243K 0
c5t7d0 - - 108 0 244K 0
c6t7d0 - - 106 0 240K 0
c7t7d0 - - 109 0 244K 0
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
the iops vary between about 70 - 140, interesting bit is that the first
raidz2 does not get any hits at all :(
Cheers
Carsten
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
