From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Mar 22 14:58:02 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFBBF106566B
	for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Sun, 22 Mar 2009 14:58:02 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from petefrench@ticketswitch.com)
Received: from constantine.ticketswitch.com (constantine.ticketswitch.com
	[IPv6:2002:57e0:1d4e:1::3])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7631E8FC08
	for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Sun, 22 Mar 2009 14:58:02 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from petefrench@ticketswitch.com)
Received: from dilbert.rattatosk ([10.64.50.6] helo=dilbert.ticketswitch.com)
	by constantine.ticketswitch.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
	(Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <petefrench@ticketswitch.com>)
	id 1LlP7b-00073c-EH; Sun, 22 Mar 2009 14:57:55 +0000
Received: from petefrench by dilbert.ticketswitch.com with local (Exim 4.69
	(FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <petefrench@ticketswitch.com>)
	id 1LlP7b-000OqQ-CW; Sun, 22 Mar 2009 14:57:55 +0000
To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, uspoerlein@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <20090322090740.GA1519@roadrunner.spoerlein.net>
Message-Id: <E1LlP7b-000OqQ-CW@dilbert.ticketswitch.com>
From: Pete French <petefrench@ticketswitch.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 14:57:55 +0000
Cc: 
Subject: Re: gemor mirror and priority
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 14:58:03 -0000

> I did this for 2-3 years and it has worked very well. Of course I took
> care of using the right priorities from the start. This setup has now
> been replaced by a ZFS mirror. The resilver time is just so much better :)

How do you find ZFS performance in an asymetric mirror, and does it
seem to cope OK if the remote disc fails ? One of the reaons I have stuck
with gmirror is that it seems extremely tolerant to having one of the
drives vanish from underneath it (as sometimes happens with a remote disc).
When I experimented doing this with ZFS I found that it did not work well
at all (lock ups until the disc I had taken away came back).

-pete.