Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 28 Feb 2017 15:04:16 +0000
From:      Shiva Bhanujan <Shiva.Bhanujan@Quorum.net>
To:        =?iso-8859-1?Q?Karli_Sj=F6berg?= <karli.sjoberg@slu.se>, Gary Palmer <gpalmer@freebsd.org>
Cc:        Jeremy Faulkner <gldisater@gmail.com>, "freebsd-fs@freebsd.org" <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>
Subject:   RE: FreeBSD restartable send/receive over WAN
Message-ID:  <3A5A10BE32AC9E45B4A22F89FC90EC0701BDB12619@QLEXC01.Quorum.local>
In-Reply-To: <0719669324a44fe0bfba3e8e08b0ae99@exch2-4.slu.se>
References:  <0719669324a44fe0bfba3e8e08b0ae99@exch2-4.slu.se>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
thanks for all the pointers for the compression algorithms.  I ran a few te=
sts to compare compression overhead.  These are local zfs send/receive, and=
 no network is involved.

time zfs send -v <src-snapshot> | <compress> | <uncompress> | zfs receive -=
s <dst-snapshot>

Here are the performance results that I got.

no compression:
real    0m20.892s
user    0m0.000s
sys     0m5.587s

xz -0:
real    8m38.569s
user    10m28.551s
sys     0m6.866s

pxz -0:
real    4m38.448s
user    10m55.863s
sys     0m13.324s

gzip:
real    3m51.297s
user    4m12.035s
sys     0m4.696s

lz4:
real    0m29.912s
user    0m16.543s
sys     0m10.810s


lz4 has the least overhead in terms of time.   pxz/xz seem to be prohibitiv=
e give the above results.  Unless, there is something basic I'm missing?

I was really hoping that compressed sends would be available, as that would=
 actively eliminate this overhead, given that we use lz4 as the compression=
 algorithm when writing to disks.



________________________________
From: Karli Sj=F6berg [karli.sjoberg@slu.se]
Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2017 8:41 AM
To: Gary Palmer
Cc: Shiva Bhanujan; Jeremy Faulkner; freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: FreeBSD restartable send/receive over WAN


Den 26 feb. 2017 4:16 em skrev Gary Palmer <gpalmer@freebsd.org>:
>
> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 02:08:59PM +0000, Shiva Bhanujan wrote:
> > The compression that we use on our ZFS filesystems is lz4.  So, if I ha=
ve to pipe it through a compression algorithm, that'd be uncompressing and =
compressing it 4 times.
> >
> > disk (lz4) -> zfs send (uncompress) -> compress (gzip) -> (network) -> =
uncompress (gzip) -> zfs recv (compress) -> disk (lz4)
> >
> > isn't this quite expensive?  We have to transfer multi terabyte files o=
n a WAN link.  I'm also of the understanding that gzip by itself is single-=
threaded, so that'd peg one of the CPUs to 100%.  there might be other comp=
ression algorithms that can be used, but sending the ZFS as it is compresse=
d on the filesystem is something that would be optimal, and would reduce th=
e overhead of the additional [de]compressions that are taking place?
>
> Without going into the efficiency part of your message:
>
> archivers/pigz: Parallel GZIP
> archivers/pbzip2: Parallel BZIP2
> archivers/pixz: Parallel, indexing version of XZ
> archivers/pxz: Parallel LZMA compressor using liblzma

Also worth mentioning is, obviously:
archivers/lz4

:)

/K

>
> Regards,
>
> Gary
>
> >
> > ________________________________________
> > From: owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org [owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org] on be=
half of Jeremy Faulkner [gldisater@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2017 4:03 PM
> > To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
> > Subject: Re: FreeBSD restartable send/receive over WAN
> >
> > Pipe it through a compressor
> >
> > On 2017-02-25 2:09 PM, Shiva Bhanujan wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I just tried restartable send/receive in 10.3 and it works like a cha=
rm.  I was wondering if compressed send has made its way into FreeBSD?  I c=
hecked 10.3 and 11.0-RELEASE, and I don't see the -c/--compressed option.  =
Any pointers?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Shiva
> > >
> > >
> > > ________________________________________
> > > From: owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org [owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org] on =
behalf of Adam Nowacki [nowakpl@platinum.linux.pl]
> > > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2017 10:41 AM
> > > To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
> > > Subject: Re: FreeBSD restartable send/receive over WAN
> > >
> > > On 2017-02-16 19:22, Shiva Bhanujan wrote:
> > >> Hello,
> > >>
> > >> I was wondering if restartable send/receive is available in FreeBSD?=
  We're running 10.2 and have a requirement of sending and receiving ZFS sn=
apshots over a WAN link.  The snapshots could be more than a few terabytes.
> > >>
> > >> Can somebody please give me pointers, and if this feature is or isn'=
t available in FreeBSD?
> > >
> > > FreeBSD 10.3 and later.
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > freebsd-fs@freebsd.org mailing list
> > > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs
> > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > freebsd-fs@freebsd.org mailing list
> > > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs
> > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > freebsd-fs@freebsd.org mailing list
> > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs
> > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
> > _______________________________________________
> > freebsd-fs@freebsd.org mailing list
> > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs
> > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
> >
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-fs@freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3A5A10BE32AC9E45B4A22F89FC90EC0701BDB12619>