From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jun 8 20:06:40 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 369C51065672 for ; Sun, 8 Jun 2008 20:06:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl [IPv6:2001:4070:101:2::1]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32A958FC13 for ; Sun, 8 Jun 2008 20:06:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m58K5NxN009836; Sun, 8 Jun 2008 22:05:23 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from localhost (wojtek@localhost) by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.2/8.14.2/Submit) with ESMTP id m58K58Zw009832; Sun, 8 Jun 2008 22:05:23 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2008 22:05:08 +0200 (CEST) From: Wojciech Puchar To: Fabian Keil In-Reply-To: <20080608162456.1c4949bc@fabiankeil.de> Message-ID: <20080608220207.C9779@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> References: <1a5a68400806080604ped08ce8p120fc21107e7de81@mail.gmail.com> <20080608162456.1c4949bc@fabiankeil.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: Anders =?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=E4ggstr=F6m?= , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD + ZFS on a production server? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2008 20:06:40 -0000 > On a system with an Athlon 1700+ and only 512 MB of RAM, > receiving snapshots on OpenSolaris renders the GUI pretty > much useless. looks like very bad CPU and I/O scheduling on Solaris. maybe that's their 32-64 hardware threads capable chip is advertised so much? :) > > On FreeBSD ZFS operations can cause delays as well, but it's > significantly better than on OpenSolaris, even though FreeBSD's > ZFS pool lies on a geli-encrypted gmirror while OpenSolaris uses > the disk directly. there is quite big difference with geli. it is CPU eater and produces delays noticable on machines that like P3 or less. but at least - it does something useful unlike these ZFS checksumming and other things. > Note that the system is below Sun's recommended specifications > for ZFS, though. Things may look differently on more powerful > systems. but comparision probably the same, or difference less noticable on stronger systems. > > You can use geli(8) for checksumming, it can be combined with gmirror > but unless with ZFS, you don't get automatic "self-healing". whatever it means ;)