Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 20:47:45 +0300 From: Stefan Parvu <sparvu@systemdatarecorder.org> To: FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: ZFS Recommendations for a new server Message-ID: <20140530204745.be5562a60cfead503d762b96@systemdatarecorder.org> In-Reply-To: <CAHieY7Ros7sXaOpWdR7E0fZvT_m%2Bz%2Bj79CaE8szxvBEyJeHhFg@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAHieY7Ros7sXaOpWdR7E0fZvT_m%2Bz%2Bj79CaE8szxvBEyJeHhFg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,
> The new server has a 2 x 1TB RE4 3ware 9650SE RAID and I have friends that
> tell me is actually better to use ZFS RAID instead of HW RAID1. Is this
> true? Why so?
It depends. You need to measure your applications with and without hdw RAID.
For example we are migrating some workloads from Debian 7 to FreeBSD 10 and
ZFS. We are using LSI MegaRaid 2208 controller and SATA disks.
We have tested on FreeBSD 10 different setups, see below:
1. HDW RAID 10 - UFS2
Seq Disk IO Test
5MB 500MB
F1.1 W 1.2 GB/sec 1.2 GB/sec
R 1.2 GB/sec 3.9 GB/sec
Random Disk IO
500 Files 2500Files
F1. 2 RR 872 MB/sec 271 MB/sec
F1.3 RW 920 MB/sec 1065 MB/sec
RR 1048 MB/sec 1089 MB/sec
2. HDW RAID 6 - UFS2
Seq Disk IO Test
5MB 500MB
F2.1 W 1.3 GB/sec 900 MB/sec
R 1.0 GB/sec 3.8 GB/sec
Random Disk IO
500 Files 2500Files
F2. 2 RR 884 MB/sec 1188 MB/sec
F2.3 RW 760 MB/sec 79 MB/sec
RR 866 MB/sec 90 MB/sec
3. RAIDZ2 Pool, 6 disks, ZFS
2500 Files
F3 RW 310 MB/sec
RR 350 MB/sec
So for our applications it seems ZFS is faster. We need RAM for caching but that is not
a problem anymore.
Seq R - Sequantial reading
Seq W - Sequantial writting
RR - Random Reads
RW - Random Writes
--
Stefan Parvu <sparvu@systemdatarecorder.org>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20140530204745.be5562a60cfead503d762b96>