Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2020 11:55:14 -0400 From: Ryan Moeller <freqlabs@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: vfs.zfs.min_auto_ashift and OpenZFS Message-ID: <f00c007f-f499-0da2-0b54-465d147884c3@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <37b914c8-6fb6-7c1c-9497-ae1402b8dd40@daemonic.se> References: <9592fb23-ef97-f0a2-5968-f10ae404e761@gmail.com> <CAPrugNpXXPjdoLsszZwwkpooDrt44gfguJfvK4qQWEUSD7%2BhZg@mail.gmail.com> <37b914c8-6fb6-7c1c-9497-ae1402b8dd40@daemonic.se>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 9/8/20 4:31 PM, Niclas Zeising wrote: > On 2020-05-02 02:20, Matthew Macy wrote: >> OpenZFS doesn't have the same ashift optimization logic that FreeBSD >> has. It's something that needs to be resolved before the code can be >> integrated downstream. > > So currently all pools created with OpenZFS will use 512 bit > alignment, at least if the underlying storage device uses 512bit > sectors (which most drives tend to do)? > > If this is the case, it feels like a pessimisation. > > Regards The vdev ashift optimizations from FreeBSD were put in OpenZFS before the import into base. That sysctl does work now. -Ryan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?f00c007f-f499-0da2-0b54-465d147884c3>