From owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Tue Aug 4 16:55:08 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9C39379E82 for ; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 16:55:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from swills@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mouf.net (mouf.net [IPv6:2607:fc50:0:4400:216:3eff:fe69:33b3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mouf.net", Issuer "mouf.net" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BLgq01ZWWz4Zv4 for ; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 16:55:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from swills@FreeBSD.org) Received: from lrrr.mouf.net (cpe-76-182-16-135.nc.res.rr.com [76.182.16.135]) (authenticated bits=0) by mouf.net (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id 074Gsqd4070359 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Tue, 4 Aug 2020 16:54:58 GMT (envelope-from swills@FreeBSD.org) Subject: Re: zfs scrub enable by default To: Matthew Ahrens Cc: freebsd-fs , George Wilson References: From: Steve Wills Message-ID: Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 12:54:47 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (mouf.net [199.48.129.64]); Tue, 04 Aug 2020 16:54:58 +0000 (UTC) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=4.5 tests=KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS, NICE_REPLY_A autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on mouf.net X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.99.2 at mouf.net X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4BLgq01ZWWz4Zv4 X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.00 / 15.00]; ASN(0.00)[asn:36236, ipnet:2607:fc50::/36, country:US]; local_wl_from(0.00)[FreeBSD.org] X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2020 16:55:08 -0000 Hi, On 8/4/20 11:54 AM, Matthew Ahrens wrote: > This question was raised elsewhere, and I agree with this reply from > George Wilson, my colleague and an expert in the i/o subsystems of ZFS > as well as having lots of experience with customers: > > Having scrubs enabled by default is a great idea but at Sun (and > Delphix too) we found that the impact was often too much for some > workloads/customers. This is the challenge we faced and why there > was never a policy to enable it everywhere. We did explore ideas to > make the impact less and to be able to always scrub. Some of those > ideas included periodic or continuous scrubs where the impact could > be reduced by only scrubbing portions of the pool at a time, at a > reduced i/o rate. At Delphix, we have investigated similar concepts > and one of our interns prototyped one of the ideas.Much has changed > since the early scrub days and revisiting some of the earlier ideas > and investigating new ones is probably a good topic for the > community. I do think that just enabling scrub by default without > further enhancements would still be too impactful for some customers > but the concept definitely has merit. > Thanks for that! Very informative. I thought the Fishworks storage appliances had it on by default, but maybe I'm mistaken or maybe it changed over time. I wonder what "some" means, that is, is it 80% of people? 50%? 20? And what percent would mean "too many" to have it on and expect them to tune it if needed. I suppose there's no way to know. There are definitely some interesting ideas for how to limit the impact of scrub, but those would definitely have to be built and proven, of course. Thanks again, really helpful! Steve