Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FreeBSD Lands Important ZFS Performance Fix For Some Going From ~60MB/s To ~600MB/s

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • FreeBSD Lands Important ZFS Performance Fix For Some Going From ~60MB/s To ~600MB/s

    Phoronix: FreeBSD Lands Important ZFS Performance Fix For Some Going From ~60MB/s To ~600MB/s

    Thanks to the BSD wizards at iXsystems, FreeBSD has received an important performance fix/optimization around their ZFS file-system code...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...ZFS-60-600-Fix

  • #2
    Michael, can you re-run your ZFS on FreeBSD vs Ubuntu ZoL test?

    I'm in the middle of deciding if I want to use FreeBSD or Linux with ZFS for my companies SAN.

    Comment


    • #3
      I love ZFS but sometimes it drives me mad. I'm currently grappling with a speed problem where my SSD-based array would provide only 1/3 of the read throughput I expect. I'm just dumping huge files onto /dev/null for the test. There's no CPU load (actually, cat seems to be quite CPU intensive when you go over 1GB/s) and no I/O wait. And when I create a second zpool from the remaining parts of the SSDs (I use LVM and only give ZFS like 80% of the disks; I need the remaining space for other purposes) with the same VDEV configuration, I get the performance I expect. What the actual Fuck!?

      Comment


      • #4
        So how does the ZFS performance compare between Solaris, Linux and FreeBSD?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by uid313 View Post
          So how does the ZFS performance compare between Solaris, Linux and FreeBSD?
          Well, you have to test with your data since there is no effective way to know. depending on your hardware, version, storage type ad controller all 3 can be winners depending the usage.

          The only thing i can say as a fact is that Linux implementation is superior in features to Solaris(open version, not sure about the closed one) and FreeBSD(current, next gen will be based on ZoL)

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by bumblebritches57 View Post
            Michael, can you re-run your ZFS on FreeBSD vs Ubuntu ZoL test?

            I'm in the middle of deciding if I want to use FreeBSD or Linux with ZFS for my companies SAN.
            Right now, it's Linux w/o question (especially if compile your own kernel with the NixOS GPL_EXPORTS patch).

            A year from now, ????? because they should both (BSD/Linux) be running damn near the same driver code and it'll be down to what kernel/OS does what better for a particular use-case.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by kobblestown View Post
              I love ZFS but sometimes it drives me mad. I'm currently grappling with a speed problem where my SSD-based array would provide only 1/3 of the read throughput I expect. I'm just dumping huge files onto /dev/null for the test. There's no CPU load (actually, cat seems to be quite CPU intensive when you go over 1GB/s) and no I/O wait. And when I create a second zpool from the remaining parts of the SSDs (I use LVM and only give ZFS like 80% of the disks; I need the remaining space for other purposes) with the same VDEV configuration, I get the performance I expect. What the actual Fuck!?
              You answered your own question.

              ZFS has its own internal LVM-like behavior and running that on top of Linux LVM can cause performance hits. Also, set your disk scheduler to noop/none with ZFS since it also has its own internal scheduler (it normally does it automatically if it detects that it's the only file system on the disk(s)).

              W/o knowing your setup better, best I can say is use ZFS by itself by giving LVM 20% of the disks and give the remaining 80% to ZFSs raidz...better would be to give one disk to not-ZFS and the rest of the disks to ZFS and is what I'd do in your situation.

              If you're using encryption, consider compiling your own kernel with the NixOS patch so ZFS can use the CPUs AES encryption.

              Comment


              • #8
                Michael

                kobblestown said a naughty word and the filter blamed me

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post
                  Right now, it's Linux w/o question (especially if compile your own kernel with the NixOS GPL_EXPORTS patch).
                  Yeah, right now Linux is out of the question, there are no decent NAS distros providing ZFS support OOTB.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
                    Yeah, right now Linux is out of the question, there are no decent NAS distros providing ZFS support OOTB.
                    Manjaro Architect if ZFS on Root isn't necessary (Architect since a desktop wouldn't be for a NAS). Manjaro provides ZFS modules for all the LTS, stable, mainline, and RC kernels and from there it's just a command line interface and installing the right tools.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X