Well, I'm more accustomed to "sequential vs. random", but YMMW. As to 67000 512 byte writes (this sounds suspiciously close to 32Mb fitting into cache), did you have write-back enabled?
Regards, Andrey On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 12:03 AM, Arne Jansen <sensi...@gmx.net> wrote: > Andrey Kuzmin wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 11:51 PM, Arne Jansen <sensi...@gmx.net <mailto: >> sensi...@gmx.net>> wrote: >> >> Andrey Kuzmin wrote: >> >> As to your results, it sounds almost too good to be true. As Bob >> has pointed out, h/w design targeted hundreds IOPS, and it was >> hard to believe it can scale 100x. Fantastic. >> >> >> Hundreds IOPS is not quite true, even with hard drives. I just tested >> a Hitachi 15k drive and it handles 67000 512 byte linear write/s, cache >> >> >> Linear? May be sequential? >> > > Aren't these synonyms? linear as opposed to random. > > >
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
