Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2023 12:21:27 -0700 From: Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com> To: frank@harz2023.behrens.de, FreeBSD-STABLE Mailing List <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: nvd->nda switch and blocksize changes for ZFS Message-ID: <D6404A01-7681-4E11-A36A-43289261C013@yahoo.com>
index | next in thread | raw e-mail
Frank Behrens <frank_at_harz2023.behrens.de> wrote on Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2023 16:31:40 UTC : > I created a zpool with a FreeBSD-14.0-CURRENT on February. With > 15.0-CURRENT/14.0-STABLE from now I get the message: > > status: One or more devices are configured to use a non-native block size. > Expect reduced performance. > action: Replace affected devices with devices that support the > configured block size, or migrate data to a properly configured > pool. > NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM > zsys ONLINE 0 0 0 > raidz1-0 ONLINE 0 0 0 > nda0p4 ONLINE 0 0 0 block size: 4096B > configured, 16384B native > nda1p4 ONLINE 0 0 0 block size: 4096B > configured, 16384B native > nda2p4 ONLINE 0 0 0 block size: 4096B > configured, 16384B native > > I use: > nda0: <Samsung SSD 980 1TB ..> > nda0: nvme version 1.4 > nda0: 953869MB (1953525168 512 byte sectors) > > I cannot imagine, that the native blocksize changed. Do I really expect > a reduced performance? > Is it advisable to switch back to nvd? Looking at: https://www.techpowerup.com/ssd-specs/samsung-980-1-tb.d58 it reports (indifferent places on the page): QUOTE Page Size: 16 KB Notes NAND Die: A Dual-plane Die with 2 sub-planes with 8 KiB pages in order to improve performance through paralellism. Endurance: Could be from 1.500 to 3.000 P.E.C. depending on NAND binning END QUOTE That "A Dual-plane Die with 2 sub-planes with 8 KiB pages", for a total of 16 KB, does suggest to me that the new messages have a chance of being correct about there being a tradeoff. (But I'm no expert in the area.) === Mark Millard marklmi at yahoo.comhelp
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?D6404A01-7681-4E11-A36A-43289261C013>