Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 16 Aug 2013 22:04:02 +0200
From:      Willem Jan Withagen <wjw@digiware.nl>
To:        Karl Denninger <karl@denninger.net>
Cc:        fs@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Fwd: Disk scheduling activity...
Message-ID:  <520E85B2.8090500@digiware.nl>
In-Reply-To: <520BA3EC.1030304@denninger.net>
References:  <520B8B1E.7060002@digiware.nl> <alpine.GSO.2.01.1308140859070.2267@freddy.simplesystems.org> <520BA249.8030603@digiware.nl> <520BA3EC.1030304@denninger.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 14-8-2013 17:36, Karl Denninger wrote:
>> That would then be the Areca controller, bacause I have the feeling
>> that it always writes later.
>>
>> --WjW
>> _
> I very much doubt the ARECA is ignoring the cache-flush request.
> 
> I have several of these and can get them into a pathological state with
> TERRIBLE performance when ZFS starts doing things that demand cache
> flushes - the ARECA will perform the demanded flush which, if you have a
> lot of RAM on the board, gets real interesting in terms of performance
> impact.

I think my wording was what wrong.
What I meant is that the Areca controller was "late" in writing because
of the battery backupped cache. If it were to ignore cache-flushes that
would make it not really a very good controller.

Your remarks of getting the controller list in its workload are sort of
worrisome....

--WjW




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?520E85B2.8090500>