On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 9:29 PM, Erik Trimble <erik.trim...@oracle.com>wrote:
> On 11/27/2010 6:50 PM, Christopher George wrote: > >> Furthermore, I don't think "1 hour sustained" is a very accurate >>> benchmark. >>> Most workloads are bursty in nature. >>> >> The IOPS degradation is additive, the length of the first and second one >> hour >> sustained period is completely arbitrary. The take away from slides 1 and >> 2 is >> drive inactivity has no effect on the eventual outcome. So with either a >> bursty >> or sustained workload the end result is always the same, dramatic write >> IOPS >> degradation after unpackaging or secure erase of the tested Flash based >> SSDs. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Christopher George >> Founder/CTO >> www.ddrdrive.com >> > > Without commenting on other threads, I often seen sustained IO in my setups > for extended periods of time - particularly, small IO which eats up my IOPS. > At this moment, I run with ZIL turned off for that pool, as it's a scratch > pool and I don't care if it gets corrupted. I suspect that a DDRdrive or one > of the STEC Zeus drives might help me, but I can overwhelm any other SSD > quickly. > > I'm doing compiles of the JDK, with a single backed ZFS system handing the > files for 20-30 clients, each trying to compile a 15 million-line JDK at the > same time. > > Lots and lots of small I/O. > > :-) > > > Sounds like you need lots and lots of 15krpm drives instead of 7200rpm SATA ;) --Tim
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
