On Mar 30, 2010, at 3:32 PM, Jeroen Roodhart wrote: >> If you are going to trick the system into thinking a volatile cache is >> nonvolatile, you >> might as well disable the ZIL -- the data corruption potential is the same. > > I'm sorry? I believe the F20 has a supercap or the like? The advise on:
You are correct, I misread the Marvell (as in F20) and X4540 (as in not X4500) combination. > http://wikis.sun.com/display/Performance/Tuning+ZFS+for+the+F5100#TuningZFSfortheF5100-ZFSF5100 > > Is to disable write caching altogether. We opted not to do _that_ though... :) Good idea. That recommendation is flawed for the general case and only applies when all devices have nonvolatile caches. > Are you sure about disabling write cache on the F20 is a bad thing to do? I agree that it is a reasonable choice. For this case, what is the average latency to the F20? -- richard ZFS storage and performance consulting at http://www.RichardElling.com ZFS training on deduplication, NexentaStor, and NAS performance Las Vegas, April 29-30, 2010 http://nexenta-vegas.eventbrite.com _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
