Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 3 Oct 2017 08:22:06 +0200
From:      Ben RUBSON <ben.rubson@gmail.com>
To:        Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        Steven Hartland <smh@FreeBSD.org>, Freebsd fs <freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org>, FreeBSD-scsi <freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: ZFS stalled after some mirror disks were lost
Message-ID:  <E01AB23B-827A-47DD-B4AB-36E3D00AB7C7@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <feff135a-3175-c5d0-eeb4-5639bb76789e@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <4A0E9EB8-57EA-4E76-9D7E-3E344B2037D2@gmail.com> <feff135a-3175-c5d0-eeb4-5639bb76789e@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On 03 Oct 2017, at 08:12, Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
>=20
> On 02/10/2017 21:12, Ben RUBSON wrote:
>> A sustained read throughput of 180 MB/s, 45 MB/s on each iscsi disk
>> according to "zpool iostat", nothing on local disks (strange but I
>> noticed that IOs always prefer iscsi disks to local disks).
>=20
> Are your local disks SSD or HDD?

HDD.

> Could it be that iSCSI disks appear to be faster than the local disks =
to the
> smart ZFS mirror code?

Or because their /dev/da<number> are greater then the local ones ?
(as they are attached after the local disks)
(my 2 cents...)
For sure we could have expected the local disks to be preferred,
or at least the load to be spread among all (local & iscsi) disks.

> Steve, what do you think?



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E01AB23B-827A-47DD-B4AB-36E3D00AB7C7>