Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2011 15:33:24 +0300 From: Volodymyr Kostyrko <c.kworr@gmail.com> To: freebsd@top-consulting.net Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FS of choice for max random iops ( Maildir ) Message-ID: <4E749394.1090607@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20110916173956.18133qtvqi91m3wg@mail.top-consulting.net> References: <20110916063153.200375qdq59crf8c@mail.top-consulting.net> <32990703-D068-4B0D-AF3A-C1E6EA0A4100@elde.net> <20110916101833.17485ybnq5srjbc4@mail.top-consulting.net> <D0FD7882-E1F6-45C4-B3BE-58E046401699@elde.net> <20110916173956.18133qtvqi91m3wg@mail.top-consulting.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
17.09.2011 00:39, freebsd@top-consulting.net wrote: > I even went as far as disabling the cache flush option of ZFS through > this variable: vfs.zfs.cache_flush_disable: 1, since I already have the > write cache of the controller. I've also set some other variables as per > the Tuning guide but according to several benchmarks ( iozone, bonnie++, > dd ) ZFS still comes in slower than UFS at pretty much everything. Oh, so you are making setup for running iozone, bonnie++ and dd continuously? You really like to wait for hours before fsck will finish checking for your volume? Listen to the others, you need real world benchmark, not some stress-tests. -- Sphinx of black quartz judge my vow.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4E749394.1090607>