Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 13:31:53 +0100 From: Steven Hartland <killing@multiplay.co.uk> To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS performance bottlenecks: CPU or RAM or anything else? Message-ID: <884c4558-c207-596a-3e3e-45a6f579b666@multiplay.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <16e474da-6b20-2e51-9981-3c262eaff350@lexa.ru> References: <8441f4c0-f8d1-f540-b928-7ae60998ba8e@lexa.ru> <f87ec54a-104e-e712-7793-86c37285fdaa@internetx.com> <16e474da-6b20-2e51-9981-3c262eaff350@lexa.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
There's been some recent commits which help sequential reads IIRC, so might be worth checking on CURRENT. On 17/05/2016 13:21, Alex Tutubalin wrote: > On 5/17/2016 3:11 PM, InterNetX - Juergen Gotteswinter wrote: >> Raidz is your Problem, go for Mirrors > > Raidz2 will survive two (any) drives failure, while mirrored stripe > will not. > > So, if it is possible to increase raidz2 performance by faster CPU or > RAM I'll go this route > > Alex > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-fs@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?884c4558-c207-596a-3e3e-45a6f579b666>