Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 22:10:17 -0400 From: Quartz <quartz@sneakertech.com> To: FreeBSD questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: sync vs async vs zfs Message-ID: <5604AD09.4080603@sneakertech.com> In-Reply-To: <BB74A712-819C-4FD9-9FB1-A5A456731AC8@kraus-haus.org> References: <56042774.6070404@sneakertech.com> <98BFE313-523F-4A2C-82BB-8683466068FB@kraus-haus.org> <560462C4.6030106@sneakertech.com> <BB74A712-819C-4FD9-9FB1-A5A456731AC8@kraus-haus.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> 1) A SLOG's only purpose is to reduce fragmentation and increase >> sync speed, correct? Re: speed, using a SLOG that's the same speed >> as the other drives in a pool is mostly pointless, right? > > Correct. And I proved that on one of my servers in pre-prodcuction > testing. Tack-on question: would an identical-speed SLOG still speed up the pool by proxy simply by reducing IO load on the vdev(s) and/or reducing head travel on the drives?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5604AD09.4080603>