Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 17:14:54 +0100 From: "Steven Hartland" <killing@multiplay.co.uk> To: "Nathan Whitehorn" <nwhitehorn@freebsd.org>, <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: fdisk(8) vs gpart(8), and gnop Message-ID: <8D276E03788643A39AABD6A7127B21A0@multiplay.co.uk> References: <20140601004242.GA97224@bewilderbeast.blackhelicopters.org> <CAOjFWZ5N9FGwgSz0_YFNQjavzdJDitRn52VKn4ipW1ddj6-weQ@mail.gmail.com> <BCA9F5D6-3925-4E7E-9082-128652508305@FreeBSD.org> <3D6974D83AE9495E890D9F3CA654FA94@multiplay.co.uk> <538B4CEF.2030801@freebsd.org> <1DB2D63312CE439A96B23EAADFA9436E@multiplay.co.uk> <538B4FD7.4090000@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nathan Whitehorn" <nwhitehorn@freebsd.org>
To: "Steven Hartland" <killing@multiplay.co.uk>; <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>
Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2014 5:07 PM
Subject: Re: fdisk(8) vs gpart(8), and gnop
> On 06/01/14 09:00, Steven Hartland wrote:
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nathan Whitehorn"
>> <nwhitehorn@freebsd.org>
>> To: <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>
>> Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2014 4:55 PM
>> Subject: Re: fdisk(8) vs gpart(8), and gnop
>>
>>
>>> On 06/01/14 08:52, Steven Hartland wrote:
>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Felder" <feld@freebsd.org>
>>>>
>>>>> On May 31, 2014, at 20:57, Freddie Cash <fjwcash@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> There's a sysctl where you can set the minimum ashift for zfs.
>>>>>> Then you
>>>>>> never need to use gnop.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I believe it's part of 10.0?
>>>>>
>>>>> I've not seen this yet. What we need is to port the ability to set
>>>>> ashift at pool creation time:
>>>>>
>>>>> $ zpool create -o ashift=12 tank mirror disk1 disk2 mirror disk3 disk4
>>>>>
>>>>> I believe the Linux zfs port has this functionality now, but we
>>>>> still do not.
>>>>
>>>> We don't have that direct option yet but you can achieve the
>>>> same thing by setting: vfs.zfs.min_auto_ashift=12
>>>>
>>> Does anyone have any objections to me changing this default, right
>>> now, today?
>>> -Nathan
>>
>> I think you will get some objections to that, as it can have quite an
>> impact
>> on the performance for disks which are 512, due to the increased
>> overhead of
>> transfering 4k when only 512 is really required. This has a more dramatic
>> impact on RAIDZx due too.
>>
>> Personally we run a custom kernel on our machines which has just this
>> change
>> in it to ensure capability with future disks, so I can confirm it does
>> indeed
>> have the desired effect :)
>
> So the discussion here is related to what to do about the installer. The
> current ZFS component unconditionally creates gnops all over the place
> to set ashift to 4k. That's across the board worse: it has exactly the
> performance impact of changing the default of this sysctl (whatever that
> is), it can't easily be overridden (which the sysctl can), and it's a
> horrible hack to boot. There are a few options:
>
> 1. Change the default of vfs.zfs.min_auto_ashift
> 2. Have the same effect but in a vastly worse way by adjusting the
> installer to create gnops
> 3. Have ZFS choose by itself and decide to do that permanently.
>
> Our ATA code is good about reporting block sizes now, so (3) isn't a big
> issue except for the mixed-pool case, which is a huge PITA.
>
> We need to choose one of these. I favor (1).
I wasn't aware of that but it should do #3
min_auto_ashift is a bigger discussion.
Regards
Steve
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8D276E03788643A39AABD6A7127B21A0>