Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 14:00:12 +0100 From: Martin Simmons <martin@lispworks.com> To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: what happens to pool if ZIL dies on ZFS v14 Message-ID: <201009221300.o8MD0Cbm030033@higson.cam.lispworks.com> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikEgrFGGUVUW8dQWGH44K41jPG=PwXXzsT5fYdV@mail.gmail.com> (message from David Brodbeck on Tue, 21 Sep 2010 15:38:22 -0700) References: <AANLkTi=vYVG300nhMjkcLju=kQhBdPJDqyaXR0mG84%2Bp@mail.gmail.com> <4C9385B0.2080909@shatow.net> <AANLkTin0LwQz%2BWi5cBOcHuVqyOz3%2BfFR7YC_=f2L5CyX@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTinbPK1rNK5hg=t7N=sqFLuh8sNrZT9DFC_ppXWF@mail.gmail.com> <20100917161847.GA58503@icarus.home.lan> <AANLkTikEgrFGGUVUW8dQWGH44K41jPG=PwXXzsT5fYdV@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>>>> On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 15:38:22 -0700, David Brodbeck said: > > If you don't have a separate log device, synchronous writes are very > slow with the ZIL enabled. This isn't such a big deal unless you're > using NFS, where essentially every write is synchronous. Is that true for all versions of NFS? In my experience (on 8.0-RELEASE), NFSv2 is indeed synchronous, but NFSv3 does asynchronous flushing (for a variety of different client OSes). __Martin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201009221300.o8MD0Cbm030033>