Hi, Indeed the 3 disks per vdev (raidz2) seems a bad idea...but it's the system i have now. Regarding the performance...let's assume that a bonnie++ benchmark could go to 200 mg/s in. The possibility of getting the same values (or near) in a zfs send / zfs receive is just a matter of putting , let's say a 10gbE card between both systems? I have the impression that benchmarks are always synthetic, therefore live/production environments behave quite differently. Again, it might be just me, but with 1gb link being able to replicate 2 servers with a average speed above 60 mb/s does seems quite good. However, like i said i would like to know other results from other guys...
Thanks for the time. Bruno On 25-3-2010 21:52, Ian Collins wrote: > On 03/26/10 08:47 AM, Bruno Sousa wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> The more readings i do about ZFS, and experiments the more i like >> this stack of technologies. >> Since we all like to see real figures in real environments , i might >> as well share some of my numbers .. >> The replication has been achieved with the zfs send / zfs receive but >> piped with mbuffer (http://www.maier-komor.de/mbuffer.html), during >> business hours , so it's a live environment and *not *a controlled >> test environment. >> >> storageA >> >> opensolaris snv_133 >> 2 quad-core amd >> 28 gb ram >> >> Seagate Barracuda SATA drives 1.5TB 7.200 rpm (ST31500341AS) - >> *non-enterprise class disks* >> 1 RAIDZ2 pool with 6 vdevs with 3 disks each connected to a lsi >> non-raid controller >> > As others have already said, raidz2 with 3 drives is Not A Good Idea! > >> storageB >> >> opensolaris snv_134 >> 2 Intel Xeon 2.0ghz >> 8 gb ram >> >> >> Seagate Barracuda SATA drives 1TB 7.200 rpm (ST31000640SS) - >> *enterprise class disks* >> 1 RAIDZ2 pool with 4 vdevs with 5 disks each connected to a Adaptec >> RAID controller(52445, 512 mb cache) with read and write cache >> enabled. The adaptec hba has 20 volumes , where one volume = one >> drive..something similar to a jbod >> >> Both systems are connected to a gigabit switch without vlans (switch >> is a 3com), and jumbo-frames are disabled. >> >> And now the results : >> >> Dataset : around 26.5 gb in files bigger than 256 KB and smaller than 1MB >> >> summary: 26.6 GByte in 6 min 20.6 sec - average of *71.7 MB/s* >> >> Dataset : around 160gb of data with files small (less than 20 kb) and >> large (bigger than 10MB) >> >> summary: 164 GByte in 34 min 41.9 sec - average of *80.6 MB/s* >> > > Those numbers look right for a 1 Gig link. Try a tool such as > bonnie++ to see what the block read and write numbers are for your > pools and if the they are significantly better than these, try an > aggregated link between the systems. > -- > Ian. > > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is > believed to be clean.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
