Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 15:39:53 +0300 From: Volodymyr Kostyrko <c.kworr@gmail.com> To: Gary Palmer <gpalmer@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: ZFS: Corrupted pool metadata after adding vdev to a pool - no opportunity to rescue data from healthy vdevs? Remove a vdev? Rewrite metadata? Message-ID: <50586B99.40108@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20120918112355.GB77784@in-addr.com> References: <000a01cd90aa$0a277310$1e765930$@goelli.de> <5050461A.9050608@gmail.com> <000001cd9239$ed734c80$c859e580$@goelli.de> <5052EC5D.4060403@gmail.com> <000a01cd9274$0aa0bba0$1fe232e0$@goelli.de> <505322C9.70200@gmail.com> <000001cd9377$e9e9b010$bdbd1030$@goelli.de> <50559CD8.1070700@gmail.com> <000001cd94f1$a4157030$ec405090$@goelli.de> <50581033.4040102@gmail.com> <20120918112355.GB77784@in-addr.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
18.09.2012 14:23, Gary Palmer wrote: >> From my point of view all hype about moving to 4k sectors is highly >> irrelevant to ZFS and current products on the market. >> >> 1. ZFS tends to use big recordsize for storing any data. This means most >> files on your drives are already stored in 128k sectors. Storing small >> tails in 512b or 4k sectors shouldn't give big difference. > > Performance testing has shown that running "advanced format" (aka 4kilobyte > sector disks) with 512 byte alignment with ZFS seriously degrades performance > compared to running with 4 kilobyte alignment. Please understand me correctly, this is only my point of view on the problem as I never saw any tests that show difference between correct alignment of _partitions_ and alignment on _records_ on ZFS. This area is not thoroughly covered with test data. -- Sphinx of black quartz judge my vow.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?50586B99.40108>