On Tue, March 16, 2010 11:53, thomas wrote: > Even if it might not be the best technical solution, I think what a lot of > people are looking for when this comes up is a knob they can use to say "I > only want X IOPS per vdev" (in addition to low prioritization) to be used > while scrubbing. Doing so probably helps them feel more at ease that they > have some excess capacity on cpu and vdev if production traffic should > come along. > > That's probably a false sense of moderating resource usage when the > current "full speed, but lowest prioritization" is just as good and would > finish quicker.. but, it gives them peace of mind?
I may have been reading too quickly, but I have the impression that at least some of the people not happy with the current prioritization were reporting severe impacts to non-scrub performance when a scrub was in progress. If that's the case, then they have a real problem, they're not just looking for more peace of mind in a hypothetical situation. -- David Dyer-Bennet, d...@dd-b.net; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
