From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 19 03:24:46 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E9EDBA1F for ; Tue, 19 Nov 2013 03:24:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pb0-f45.google.com (mail-pb0-f45.google.com [209.85.160.45]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C59952EF8 for ; Tue, 19 Nov 2013 03:24:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pb0-f45.google.com with SMTP id rp16so1254655pbb.32 for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2013 19:24:46 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=mv/l4PByAdz8xuXj4x0nCbW8rkDkKLMGEl/eidqnjI8=; b=C28dj4DUyBM2peBdDT4jpoonzzAYG3qnYOOMEMvt0iCbBE6ft+zDUgGshw0izrUvgL OCTx9zrGKIKK4d1zSb/CBdAlQFEQvjaHvxsHZfioM7H03PF2ZgYZcKfR3kz3QKVSQ1/D XzZhBcxmS/Mctvfg3t+Ub3yrq/MdWNRjM+pX4opwzz2EmL7KaYviw0cigl1rw8daIbKk ZCdR0smZfi/AS6S3qoP4gEeTG8+RQLoWimDuY5mVCU65lvN2WYlHw4xQ6e85w69/jckL vbyIySWodANdIVr5lBhEclJQqrpee8eeXxwb0SQPj699QzXcEqyzjC5r+g0L0tqmY9ve 3mZg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmSiPDPwf72ISFHZ6lanjQ+aYNTcgkr18Mfn4+8uxjIEZbgTsX494Oyy4qvHqJfiGic+hp9 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.66.218.198 with SMTP id pi6mr24563789pac.107.1384831485859; Mon, 18 Nov 2013 19:24:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.70.102.133 with HTTP; Mon, 18 Nov 2013 19:24:45 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20131118210328.Horde.ONsT69y3hBKUccCAO1qR4Q8@www.vfemail.net> References: <20131118210328.Horde.ONsT69y3hBKUccCAO1qR4Q8@www.vfemail.net> Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 20:24:45 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Performance difference between UFS and ZFS with NFS From: Eric Browning To: Rick Romero Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.16 Cc: FreeBSD FS X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.16 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 03:24:47 -0000 @Rick R I will check on controller caching, I just left the defaults so I assume they are on and had cache flushing disabled already for ZFS. @Jason F. Changing to Solaris isn't an option right now and knowing Mac is a kissing cousin of FreeBSD I prefer to stay with what I know. It's been pretty rock solid so far. Thanks, On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 8:03 PM, Rick Romero wrote: > > Quoting Eric Browning : > > > Right now I'm going to have to abandon ZFS until it works with NFS. I >> don't want to get into a finger pointing game, I'd just like to help get >> this fixed, I have one old i386 server I can try things out on if that >> helps and it's already on 9 stable and ZFS v28. >> > > When you created the raid0, did you leave the disk cache enabled? I know > it's against the purpose of ZFS to leave the controller and drive caches > enabled, but it sure improves performance. > > In both our cases, (IIRC)NFS will also wait for that commit response - so > if the caches are disabled, NFS really begins to drag. I believe there was > a commit in 9.2 that allowed modification of a sysctl to disable/change the > NFS commit... in some manner.. I forget exactly.. they all tie in together. > > Also disable the cache flushing. > See https://wiki.freebsd.org/ZFSTuningGuide > And http://forums.freebsd.org/archive/index.php/t-30856.html > > > Rick > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-fs@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > -- Eric Browning Systems Administrator 801-984-7623 Skaggs Catholic Center Juan Diego Catholic High School Saint John the Baptist Middle Saint John the Baptist Elementary