Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 08:54:08 -0700 From: Dennis Glatting <freebsd@penx.com> To: Freddie Cash <fjwcash@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS HBAs + LSI chip sets (Was: ZFS hang (system #2)) Message-ID: <1350834848.88577.33.camel@btw.pki2.com> In-Reply-To: <CAOjFWZ7G%2BaLPiPQTaUOE5oJY3So0cWYKvU86y4BZ2MQL%2BbqGMA@mail.gmail.com> References: <1350698905.86715.33.camel@btw.pki2.com> <1350711509.86715.59.camel@btw.pki2.com> <50825598.3070505@FreeBSD.org> <1350744349.88577.10.camel@btw.pki2.com> <1350765093.86715.69.camel@btw.pki2.com> <508322EC.4080700@FreeBSD.org> <1350778257.86715.106.camel@btw.pki2.com> <CAOjFWZ7G%2BaLPiPQTaUOE5oJY3So0cWYKvU86y4BZ2MQL%2BbqGMA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 2012-10-20 at 23:52 -0700, Freddie Cash wrote: > On Oct 20, 2012 5:11 PM, "Dennis Glatting" <freebsd@pki2.com> wrote: > > > > > > I chosen the LSI2008 chip set because the code was donated by LSI, and > > they therefore demonstrated interest in supporting their products under > > FreeBSD, and that chip set is found in a lot of places, notably > > Supermicro boards. Additionally, there were stories of success on the > > lists for several boards. That said, I have received private email from > > others expressing frustration with ZFS and the "hang" problems, which I > > believe are also the LSI chips. > > > > I have two questions for the broader list: > > > > 1) What HBAs are you using for ZFS and what is your level > > of success/stability? Also, what is your load? > > SuperMicro AOC-USAS-8i using the mpt(4) driver on FreeBSD 9-STABLE in one > server (alpha). > > SuperMicro AOC-USAS2-8i using the mps(4) driver on FreeBSD 9-STABLE in 2 > servers (beta and omega). > > I think they were updated on Oct 10ish. > > The alpha box runs 12 parallel rsync processes to backup 50-odd Linux > servers across multiple data centres. > > The beta box runs 12 parallel rsync processes to backup 100-odd Linux and > FreeBSD servers across 50-odd buildings. > > Both boxes uses zfs send to replicate the data to omega (each box saturates > a 1 Gbps link during the zfs send). > > Alpha and omega have 24 SATA 3 Gbps harddrives, configured as 3x 8-drive > raidz2 vdevs, with a 32 GB SSD split between OS, log vdev, and cache vdev. > > Beta has 16 SATA 6 Gbps harddrives, configured into 3x 5-drive raidz2 > vdevs, with a cold-spare, and a 32 GB SSD split between OS, log vdev, and > cache vdev. > > All three have been patched to support feature flags. All three have > dedupe enabled, compression enabled, and HPN SSH patches with the NONE > cipher enabled. > > All three run without any serious issues. The only issues we've had are 3, > maybe 4, situations where I've tried to destroy multi-TB filesystems > without enough RAM in the machine. We're now running a minimum of 32 GB of > RAM with 64 GB in one box. > > > 2) How well is the LSI chip sets supported under FreeBSD? > > I have no complaints. And we're ordering a bunch of LSI 9200-series > controllers for new servers (PCI brackets instead of UIO). Perhaps I am doing something fundamentally wrong with my SSDs. Currently I simply add them to a pool after being ashift aligned via gnop (e.g., -S 4096, depending on page size). I remember reading somewhere about offsets to insure data is page aligned but, IIRC, this was strictly a performance issue. Are you doing something different?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1350834848.88577.33.camel>