From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 14 20:34:04 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCA141065741 for ; Sun, 14 Feb 2010 20:34:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mloftis@wgops.com) Received: from juggler.wgops.com (juggler.wgops.com [204.11.247.41]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A94278FC17 for ; Sun, 14 Feb 2010 20:34:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: by juggler.wgops.com (Postfix, from userid 65534) id 91A27A811D; Sun, 14 Feb 2010 13:34:03 -0700 (MST) X-Spam-ASN: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on juggler.wgops.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED, SARE_SUB_OBFU_OTHER autolearn=no version=3.2.5 Received: from [192.168.1.44] (host-72-174-39-176.msl-mt.client.bresnan.net [72.174.39.176]) by juggler.wgops.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3CA4AA8005 for ; Sun, 14 Feb 2010 13:34:01 -0700 (MST) Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 13:34:00 -0700 From: Michael Loftis To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.95.3 at juggler X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: More zfs benchmarks X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 20:34:04 -0000 --On Sunday, February 14, 2010 5:28 PM +0000 Jonathan Belson wrote: > Hiya > > After reading some earlier threads about zfs performance, I decided to > test my own server. I found the results rather surprising... > You really need to test with at least 4GB of data, else you're just testing caching speeds on writing. Use a test suite like bonnie++ and you'll see just how poor the ZFS performance is, especially with multiple readers on the same file, atleast in 8.0.