Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2020 17:46:46 -0400 From: Ryan Moeller <freqlabs@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: vfs.zfs.min_auto_ashift and OpenZFS Message-ID: <0dcd6763-76e3-379f-55c1-e917d2344e1d@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20200909214008.GB2033@zxy.spb.ru> References: <9592fb23-ef97-f0a2-5968-f10ae404e761@gmail.com> <CAPrugNpXXPjdoLsszZwwkpooDrt44gfguJfvK4qQWEUSD7%2BhZg@mail.gmail.com> <37b914c8-6fb6-7c1c-9497-ae1402b8dd40@daemonic.se> <f00c007f-f499-0da2-0b54-465d147884c3@FreeBSD.org> <20200909214008.GB2033@zxy.spb.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 9/9/20 5:40 PM, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > On Wed, Sep 09, 2020 at 11:55:14AM -0400, Ryan Moeller wrote: > >> 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. > Ugly hack w/ geom_noop required again? I believe you can do `-o ashift=` with zpool create/add now. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?0dcd6763-76e3-379f-55c1-e917d2344e1d>