Another option to look at is:
set zfs:zfs_nocacheflush=1
http://www.solarisinternals.com/wiki/index.php/ZFS_Evil_Tuning_Guide

Best option is to get a a fast ZIL log device.


Depends on your pool as well. NFS+ZFS means zfs will wait for write
completes before responding to a sync NFS write ops.  If you have a RAIDZ
array, writes will be slower than a RAID10 style pool.


On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:08 AM, Greg Mason <gma...@msu.edu> wrote:

> We're running into a performance problem with ZFS over NFS. When working
> with many small files (i.e. unpacking a tar file with source code), a
> Thor (over NFS) is about 4 times slower than our aging existing storage
> solution, which isn't exactly speedy to begin with (17 minutes versus 3
> minutes).
>
> We took a rough stab in the dark, and started to examine whether or not
> it was the ZIL.
>
> Performing IO tests locally on the Thor shows no real IO problems, but
> running IO tests over NFS, specifically, with many smaller files we see
> a significant performance hit.
>
> Just to rule in or out the ZIL as a factor, we disabled it, and ran the
> test again. It completed in just under a minute, around 3 times faster
> than our existing storage. This was more like it!
>
> Are there any tunables for the ZIL to try to speed things up? Or would
> it be best to look into using a high-speed SSD for the log device?
>
> And, yes, I already know that turning off the ZIL is a Really Bad Idea.
> We do, however, need to provide our users with a certain level of
> performance, and what we've got with the ZIL on the pool is completely
> unacceptable.
>
> Thanks for any pointers you may have...
>
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Reply via email to