From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat May 23 13:04:06 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C20C910656B7 for ; Sat, 23 May 2009 13:04:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from randy@psg.com) Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::36]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E5AD8FC12 for ; Sat, 23 May 2009 13:04:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from randy@psg.com) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=rmac.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1M7qtR-000Ekp-Dv; Sat, 23 May 2009 13:04:05 +0000 Received: from rmac.local.psg.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rmac.psg.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AE1D1963BEA; Sat, 23 May 2009 06:04:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 23 May 2009 06:04:04 -0700 Message-ID: From: Randy Bush To: Artis Caune In-Reply-To: <9e20d71e0905230537ibcaf852g1dc32b6ffc3a681d@mail.gmail.com> References: <9e20d71e0905230537ibcaf852g1dc32b6ffc3a681d@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.5 (Almost Unreal) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.9 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Goj=F2?=) APEL/10.7 Emacs/22.3 (i386-apple-darwin9.6.0) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: freebsd-fs Subject: Re: raidz2 a bit big X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 23 May 2009 13:04:08 -0000 >> NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM >> tank ONLINE 0 0 0 >> raidz2 ONLINE 0 0 0 >> da0s3 ONLINE 0 0 0 >> da1s3 ONLINE 0 0 0 >> da2s1 ONLINE 0 0 0 >> da3s1 ONLINE 0 0 0 >> da4s1 ONLINE 0 0 0 >> da5s1 ONLINE 0 0 0 >> da6s1 ONLINE 0 0 0 >> da7s1 ONLINE 0 0 0 >> da8s1 ONLINE 0 0 0 >> da9s1 ONLINE 0 0 0 >> da10s1 ONLINE 0 0 0 >> da11s1 ONLINE 0 0 0 > > Reads on such configurations are very slow. how are writes? > If one of your disk, for example, is capable of 100 IO per/sec, then: > with 12 disks in one raidz2 vdev you get only 100 IOPS > with 4 disks in raidz2 (total 3 raidz2 vdevs) you get 300 IOPS > with 2 disks in mirror (total 6 mirror vdevs) you can get 1200 IOPS ok. sounds nice. but then, don't i have six file systems and have to start playing lay-out design games? randy