Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 18 Feb 2010 19:19:54 -0800
From:      Matt Reimer <mattjreimer@gmail.com>
To:        Dan Naumov <dan.naumov@gmail.com>
Cc:        FreeBSD-STABLE Mailing List <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>, rnoland@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: booting off a ZFS pool consisting of multiple striped mirror  vdevs
Message-ID:  <f383264b1002181919k5e624c05t84e5f8bc02767093@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <cf9b1ee01002181636y5776968cn1e8c49deae7e8311@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <cf9b1ee01002160038o25e17bc8sd54e66be7c67f859@mail.gmail.com> <f383264b1002181057y48e56cebv1c8bbb1c0fe9d1d2@mail.gmail.com> <f383264b1002181503q74d1fc95y470f11be49c11d2f@mail.gmail.com> <cf9b1ee01002181636y5776968cn1e8c49deae7e8311@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 4:36 PM, Dan Naumov <dan.naumov@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> A stripe of 3-way mirrors, whoa. Out of curiosity, what is the system
> used for? I am not doubting that there exist some uses/workloads for a
> system that uses 6 disks with 2 disks worth of usable space, but
> that's a bit of an unusual configuration. What are your system/disc
> specs and what kind of performance are you seeing from the pool?
>

It's for a reasonably busy webserver hosting a few hundred domains, which
tends to be somewhat seek-intensive.

For this pool we had two main criteria: speed and double-disk redundancy. A
stripe of three two-way mirrors would only give us single-disk redundancy in
the worst case (i.e. losing both disks in one of the mirrors), so we went
with two three-way mirrors instead. Even though we're only getting the
capacity of two disks worth of space, we'll still have 6x the capacity of
the array it's replacing.

A simple-minded dd test gives me ~180MB/s writing a single long file, and
400-500MB/s reading.

Matt



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?f383264b1002181919k5e624c05t84e5f8bc02767093>