artiepen wrote: > 40MB/sec is the best that it gets. Really, the average is 5. I see 4, 5, 2, > and 6 almost 10x as many times as I see 40MB/sec. It really only bumps up to > 40 very rarely. > > As far as random vs. sequential. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I used dd to > make files from /dev/zero, wouldn't that be sequential? I measure with zpool > iostat 2 in another ssh session while making files of various sizes. > > This is a test system. I'm wondering, now, if I should just reconfigure with > maybe 7 disks and add another spare. Seems to be the general consensus that > bigger raid pools = worse performance. I thought the opposite was true...
A quick test on a system with 21 1TB SATA-drives in a single RAIDZ2 group show a performance of about 400MB/s with a single dd, blocksize=1048576. Creating a 10G-file with mkfile takes 25 seconds also. So I'd say basically there is nothing wrong with the zpool configuration. Can you paste some "iostat -xn 1" output while your test is running? --Arne _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
