Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 22:22:48 +0100 From: Michel Talon <talon@lpthe.jussieu.fr> To: Mark Felder <feld@feld.me> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS regimen: scrub, scrub, scrub and scrub again. Message-ID: <101D6382-BF57-43EB-A5FA-A63D4062F5FD@lpthe.jussieu.fr>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 14:26:43 -0600, Chris Rees <utisoft@gmail.com> wrote: > > So we have to take your word for it? > Provide a link if you're going to make assertions, or they're no more > than > your own opinion. I've heard this same thing -- every vdev == 1 drive in performance. I've never seen any proof/papers on it though. first google answer from request "raids performance" https://blogs.oracle.com/roch/entry/when_to_and_not_to Effectively, as a first approximation, an N-disk RAID-Z group will behave as a single device in terms of delivered random input IOPS. Thus a 10-disk group of devices each capable of 200-IOPS, will globally act as a 200-IOPS capable RAID-Z group. This is the price to pay to achieve proper data protection without the 2X block overhead associated with mirroring. -- Michel Talon talon@lpthe.jussieu.fr [-- Attachment #2 --] 0 *H 010 + 0 *H o000 *H 0,10 UFR1 0U CNRS10UCNRS20 090121090352Z 290120090352Z0510 UFR1 0U CNRS10UCNRS2-Standard0"0 *H 0 dj#þ*](?DkG57tMaLw[שeɬ<{"G_xyBearc@[g'>wMyoK RXB37wlX%ن\.p9*ؒi/Re`̏\.L7<PAz<\ݰsz;3 M[8.3vrT-PhwiQ$8,lNc1Z 00U00URGY<xfk [0TU#M0KP 3F<k; 0.0,10 UFR1 0U CNRS10UCNRS2 0U0>U705031/-http://crls.services.cnrs.fr/CNRS2/getder.crl0 *H OL'jPUL,v>Y/hC,kge+1ς"l|L{L) >{$L2zڬ`uf~ #DŽ]HN,ԍ/6)ogmZ џ˯Uʱ[\tFcG~,ο0 Fl?0~n9IϓiȞgsJ|B(ݥUd?Ta&`@/!8 wg00P;0 *H 0510 UFR1 0U CNRS10UCNRS2-Standard0 120424111602Z 140424111602Z0l10 UFR1 0U CNRS10UUMR758910UMichel Talon1%0# *H talon@lpthe.jussieu.fr0"0 *H 0 oսD%ѢV*&7o66X79c_ Tj<Bǥ\0,Q>2Mmb}ɗhBSn,U$&A4}O.(03VFvU4c#Qt駁 VD3#vܼRJ_rO@Ő8ː3+ڠ2l{I6T@X#9_5ՍMcAFlrT } 00U0 0 `HB0U0z `HB mkCertificat CNRS2-Standard. Pour toute information se reporter
