From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 19 21:56:13 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8964F106564A for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 21:56:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fjwcash@gmail.com) Received: from mail-gy0-f182.google.com (mail-gy0-f182.google.com [209.85.160.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 456AD8FC08 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 21:56:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: by gyf2 with SMTP id 2so5553643gyf.13 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 14:56:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=N57mpa1+oR7xG9QH2vdE3v8OP6S67IHlA0rf8fTMPNc=; b=hvvlCRzIwekUjpb7qptyzfagKCEW5VeOb0U6yyyFmGKnl8r+dtSkViMwGEz32N9uTM 2CzBS8mAMHl0GdheWRF4gJ0E1svUe18RlhbPQqjsBlOZRui5SaS4El3hjgNWBOEWBnuc ujhY4w5f9xZgrETVxqKebNSFXk1Y3Ok116yF8= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.94.18 with SMTP id cy18mr32812vdb.101.1316469372522; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 14:56:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.198.130 with HTTP; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 14:56:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <1316459220.35419.YahooMailClassic@web121209.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 14:56:12 -0700 Message-ID: From: Freddie Cash To: Bob Friesenhahn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS obn FreeBSD hardware model for 48 or 96 sata3 paths... X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 21:56:13 -0000 On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 2:15 PM, Bob Friesenhahn < bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us> wrote: > >> It's too bad, because it would be a nice setup, ordered from fastert to >> slowest: ARC for metadata, L2ARC for file data, pool for permanent >> storage. >> > > L2ARC has extreme bandwidth limitations as compared with RAM. Be careful > what you wish for. > > For writes (7 MBps, I believe); there shouldn't be any limits on the reads. -- Freddie Cash fjwcash@gmail.com