From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 24 17:01:29 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21D46B8F for ; Fri, 24 May 2013 17:01:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from steve@sohara.org) Received: from uk1rly2283.eechost.net (relay01a.mail.uk1.eechost.net [217.69.40.75]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E031CF3C for ; Fri, 24 May 2013 17:01:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [31.186.37.179] (helo=smtp.marelmo.com) by uk1rly2283.eechost.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Ufv3r-0003ll-Fk for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Fri, 24 May 2013 17:41:47 +0100 Received: from [192.168.63.1] (helo=steve.marelmo.com) by smtp.marelmo.com with smtp (Exim 4.80.1 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1Ufv48-0008JP-Ra for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Fri, 24 May 2013 16:42:04 +0000 Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 17:42:04 +0100 From: Steve O'Hara-Smith To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS install on a partition Message-Id: <20130524174204.7b5206d55751b1ecb4def2f9@sohara.org> In-Reply-To: <20130523090021.GD1426@pcjas.obspm.fr> References: <372082cab2064846809615a8073e022c@DB3PR07MB059.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <20130523090021.GD1426@pcjas.obspm.fr> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.3.0 (GTK+ 2.24.17; amd64-portbld-freebsd9.1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Auth-Info: 15567@permanet.ie (plain) X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 17:01:29 -0000 On Thu, 23 May 2013 11:00:21 +0200 Albert Shih wrote: > Before I'm installing my server under 9.0 + ZFS I do some benchmarks with > ionice to compare > > FreeBSD 9.0+ ZFS + 12 disk SATA 7200 rpm vs CentOS + H700 + 12 disk > SAS 15krpm > > (Both are same Dell poweredge). > > And the ZFS+12 disk sata goes much faster than CentOS+H700+ext4 almost > everywhere. Only for small file AND small record size the ZFS is slower > than CentOS. Hmm I wonder if that's mostly down to the SAS drives seeking faster or between ZFS and ext4. The only real way to tell would be to give both boxes the same kind of drives. -- Steve O'Hara-Smith