Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2015 14:50:52 -0400 From: Quartz <quartz@sneakertech.com> To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS raid write performance? Message-ID: <5589AA8C.30304@sneakertech.com> In-Reply-To: <55897878.30708@kateley.com> References: <5587C3FF.9070407@sneakertech.com> <5587C97F.2000407@delphij.net> <55887810.3080301@sneakertech.com> <20150622221422.GA71520@neutralgood.org> <55888E0D.6040704@sneakertech.com> <20150623002854.GB96928@neutralgood.org> <5588D291.4030806@sneakertech.com> <20150623042234.GA66734@neutralgood.org> <alpine.GSO.2.01.1506230812550.4186@freddy.simplesystems.org> <55897878.30708@kateley.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Is it possible that the suggestion for the "landing pad" could be > recommending a smaller ssd pool? Then replicating back to a slower pool? It was for a single not-raid disk (then presumably rsyncing the files over to the pool, or something). The thought process seemed to be that a single disk always beat a raid-with-parity (ie; raid5, raidz2, etc) when it came to write speed. > This is another argument for Quartz to test like he(?) would use in > production. Yeah, it's just that that's not terribly convenient at the moment. I think I'll just toss another drive in there and do some limited testing when we start copying things over.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5589AA8C.30304>