From owner-freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed May  7 07:33:57 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 40CEF791
 for <freebsd-geom@freebsd.org>; Wed,  7 May 2014 07:33:57 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail.tdx.com (mail.tdx.com [62.13.128.18])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC8D180
 for <freebsd-geom@freebsd.org>; Wed,  7 May 2014 07:33:56 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from study64.tdx.co.uk (study64.tdx.co.uk [62.13.130.231])
 (authenticated bits=0)
 by mail.tdx.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/) with ESMTP id s477XlUt002150
 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
 Wed, 7 May 2014 08:33:48 +0100 (BST)
Date: Wed, 07 May 2014 08:33:48 +0100
From: Karl Pielorz <kpielorz_lst@tdx.co.uk>
To: Pete French <petefrench@ingresso.co.uk>, freebsd-geom@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Anyone using HAST in production / performance?
Message-ID: <A6BBDA2C655FCD0A7D285AA3@study64.tdx.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <E1Whcqc-0008Eq-0C@dilbert.ingresso.co.uk>
References: <E1Whcqc-0008Eq-0C@dilbert.ingresso.co.uk>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Mac OS X)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-BeenThere: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: GEOM-specific discussions and implementations
 <freebsd-geom.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-geom>,
 <mailto:freebsd-geom-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-geom/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-geom@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-geom-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-geom>,
 <mailto:freebsd-geom-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 May 2014 07:33:57 -0000



--On 6 May 2014 11:43:42 +0100 Pete French <petefrench@ingresso.co.uk> 
wrote:

>> I guess if you're just using the zool 'locally' - that 31Mbyte/sec may
>> be  close to the performance you're getting [estimated]?
>
> I just diud a very unscientific test - dd of /dev/random into a fle,
> and I see about 30 meg/second in gstat, and the end result
> is about that too, so well guessed ;)

Yeah, not a bad guess :) - Looks like I'm not doing anything 'obviously' 
wrong - it's just going as fast as it does...

>> What version of FreeBSD are you using? I'm just wondering if that's
>> making  a difference...
>
> 9.2 - from the day after heartbleed came out. 10k drives, gig
> ether between the boxes.

Looks like I'm back to looking at iSCSI -> ZFS then for now. HAST has coped 
with everything I've thrown at it ('failure' wise) but I need more speed 
than that as storage for VM's etc.

Thanks for the info anyway,

-Karl