Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 18:52:49 -0700 From: Jason Matthews <jason@broken.net> To: zfs@lists.illumos.org, "zfs-discuss@list.zfsonlinux.org" <zfs-discuss@list.zfsonlinux.org>, developer <developer@open-zfs.org>, freebsd-fs <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>, zfs-discuss <zfs-discuss@zfsonlinux.org>, "developer@lists.illumos.org" <developer@lists.illumos.org> Subject: Re: [zfs] RE: granularity of performance penalty from resilvering Message-ID: <5626EFF1.9020208@broken.net> In-Reply-To: <A5A6EA4AE9DCC44F8E7FCB4D6317B1D202B43A690EC1@SH-MAIL.ISSI.COM> References: <CAJjvXiG7-MeUvGv4r=80nPfmr2qdhTwx_NtgFw5MpQ-CjkSLbA@mail.gmail.com> <A5A6EA4AE9DCC44F8E7FCB4D6317B1D202B43A690DF9@SH-MAIL.ISSI.COM> <5626E4B3.2020904@broken.net> <A5A6EA4AE9DCC44F8E7FCB4D6317B1D202B43A690EC1@SH-MAIL.ISSI.COM>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
That is the only way to fly... j. On 10/20/2015 6:35 PM, Fred Liu wrote: > > Yeah. I want to go the other way. Plus, these settings are only > applicable in illumos. > > Therefore I decide to give up the hybrid( ssd+sata) solution to > underpin applications which need decent RAS. > > I am gonna go all-flash array. > > Thanks. > > Fred > > *From:*Jason Matthews [mailto:jason@broken.net] > *Sent:* 星期三, 十月21, 2015 9:05 > *To:* zfs@lists.illumos.org; Fred Liu; > zfs-discuss@list.zfsonlinux.org; developer; freebsd-fs; zfs-discuss > *Subject:* Re: [zfs] RE: granularity of performance penalty from > resilvering > > > > you could look at these tunables (not the settings themselves)... > > these settings actually make resilvers have a higher priority. You > obviously would want to go the other way. > > j. > > |* Prioritize resilvering by setting the delay to zero| > |set zfs:zfs_resilver_delay = 0 | > > * Prioritize scrubs by setting the delay to zero > set zfs:zfs_scrub_delay = 0 > > |* resilver for five seconds per TXG| > |set zfs:zfs_resilver_min_time_ms = 5000| > > > |echo zfs_resilver_delay/w0 | mdb -kw| > |echo zfs_scrub_delay/w0 |mdb -kw| > |echo zfs_top_maxinflight/w7f |mdb -kw| > |echo zfs_resilver_min_time_ms/w1388 |mdb -kw| > > On 10/19/2015 11:49 PM, Fred Liu wrote: > > Yes, “zpool scrub –s” can stop the resilvering. > > *From:*Fred Liu > *Sent:* 星 期二, 十月20, 2015 12:15 > *To:* 'zfs-discuss@list.zfsonlinux.org > <mailto:zfs-discuss@list.zfsonlinux.org>'; developer; illumos-zfs; > freebsd-fs; zfs-discuss > *Subject:* granularity of performance penalty from resilvering > > Sorry if is a duplicate thread. > > The last suffering has been lasted for two weeks for we replaced a > 6TB HDD. > > There should be some IO throttle measure from ZFS software stack. > At least, we can try to stop resilvering like scrubbing > > if the realization is quiet complicated. > > Besides that, will nice zil/cache be relief? > > Thanks. > > Fred > > *illumos-zfs* | Archives > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/182191/=now>; > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/182191/22567878-8480fd5f>; > | Modify > <https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=22567878&id_secret=22567878-f5b912c9>; > Your Subscription [Powered by Listbox] <http://www.listbox.com>; >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5626EFF1.9020208>