Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2008 22:05:08 +0200 (CEST) From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> To: Fabian Keil <freebsd-listen@fabiankeil.de> Cc: Anders =?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=E4ggstr=F6m?= <hagge.lists@intercorner.net>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD + ZFS on a production server? Message-ID: <20080608220207.C9779@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> In-Reply-To: <20080608162456.1c4949bc@fabiankeil.de> References: <1a5a68400806080604ped08ce8p120fc21107e7de81@mail.gmail.com> <20080608162456.1c4949bc@fabiankeil.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> 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 ;)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080608220207.C9779>