From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 20 03:39:00 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B780F13C for ; Wed, 20 Mar 2013 03:39:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from davide.damico@contactlab.com) Received: from mail2.shared.smtp.contactlab.it (mail2.shared.smtp.contactlab.it [93.94.37.7]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FAF8996 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 2013 03:39:00 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=contactlab.it; s=clab1; c=relaxed/relaxed; q=dns/txt; i=@contactlab.it; t=1363750739; h=From:Subject:Date:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; bh=UiXrIpyjveheb2bnmOMcaWyzYnXnGehw/+R8Lg/NgHo=; b=wKOscCPFBblYQ4KEO+O+xQ4fxjlN//RhL7b45yIUjYHFEO6VbiWH5rMPC/0vM6UX MM2qstbVXU8t0sl9BGn1xo37/N/znJcfFQcVlE0eO4kxUuvon+T2Q+mHUzs5xFQN GqRdYuaXS7vjBWITg+zh5C3d/Y0YZyXRZnYqmMkXtOk=; Received: from [213.92.90.12] ([213.92.90.12:57676] helo=mail3.tomato.it) by t.contactlab.it (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 3.5.1.37854 r(Momo-dev:3.5.1.0)) with ESMTP id 27/18-24145-35F29415; Wed, 20 Mar 2013 04:38:59 +0100 Received: from mx3-master.housing.tomato.lan ([172.16.7.55]) by mail3.tomato.it with smtp (Exim 4.80.1 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1UI9rf-0000j6-2j for freebsd-fs@freebsd.org; Wed, 20 Mar 2013 04:38:59 +0100 Received: (qmail 2791 invoked by uid 80); 20 Mar 2013 03:38:59 -0000 To: Bob Friesenhahn Subject: Re: FreBSD 9.1 and ZFS v28 performances X-PHP-Script: uebmeil.sys.tomatointeractive.it/index.php for 172.16.16.51 X-PHP-Originating-Script: 0:main.inc MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 04:38:58 +0100 From: Davide D'Amico Organization: ContactLab Mail-Reply-To: In-Reply-To: References: <514729BD.2000608@contactlab.com> <810E5C08C2D149DBAC94E30678234995@multiplay.co.uk> <51473D1D.3050306@contactlab.com> <1DD6360145924BE0ABF2D0979287F5F4@multiplay.co.uk> <51474F2F.5040003@contactlab.com> <51475267.1050204@contactlab.com> <514757DD.9030705@contactlab.com> <42B9D942BA134E16AFDDB564858CA007@multiplay.co.uk> <1bfdea0efb95a7e06554dadf703d58e7@sys.tomatointeractive.it> Message-ID: <6d4c0172b3aa157a4e80212be4083966@sys.tomatointeractive.it> X-Sender: davide.damico@contactlab.com User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/0.8.5 Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list Reply-To: davide.damico@contactlab.com List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 03:39:00 -0000 Il 20.03.2013 02:34 Bob Friesenhahn ha scritto: > On Mon, 18 Mar 2013, Davide D'Amico wrote: >>> While running the tests what sort of thing are you >>> seeing from gstat, any disks maxing? If so primarily >>> read or write? >> Here the r/w pattern using zpool iostat 2: > > Using 'zpool iostat 2' is not likely to be very useful since zfs > writes all of is data in bursts and may wait up to 5 seconds to do so. > > If your benchmark uses synchronous writes and does continous updates, > then you should see zfs writing continiously to your zil device (or > the pool). And so, considering I'm using an SSD as ZIL device, I don't understand why ZFS performances are so slow (0.5x UFS performances). My benchmark is a set of 50k queries (select, insert, updates) that 'stress' the FS more than the 'simple' oltp tests. Thank, d.