On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Matthew Ahrens <[email protected]>
wrote:

> I have 2 outstanding review requests that I could use feedback on.  These
> have been open for quite a while so I'm probably going to RTI them this
> weekend.
>
> Provide mechanism to artificially limit disk performance
> https://github.com/openzfs/openzfs/pull/39
>

​FWIW, I also wrote up a short article about this change. E.g. how to use
it, and
an example of how to verify it's working using dtrace​. Not sure if that'll
make it
any more approachable to review....

http://www.prakashsurya.com/2015/12/07/openzfs-artificial-disk-latency-using-zinject/


> This patch hijacks the existing 'zinject -D MSECS -d GUID' command,
> slightly modifying it's interface and behavior to allow a user to
> set per disk target latencies for IO requests. This is useful when
> trying to run performance tests, and/or make performance critical
> changes, but need to rule out the normal variance of hard drives. Using
> this facility, the user can configure a disk to complete each IO request
> in a configurable amount of time while also configuring the number of
> 'lanes' of the device (i.e. the number concurrent IO requests possible).
> For example, the following will configure the disk to complete each IO
>
> 6370 ZFS send fails to transmit some holes
> https://github.com/openzfs/openzfs/pull/37
>
> In certain circumstances, "zfs send -i" (incremental send) can produce a
> stream which will result in incorrect sparse file contents on the
> target.
> *illumos-zfs* | Archives
> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/182191/=now>
> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/182191/27764512-557e5721> |
> Modify
> <https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=27764512&id_secret=27764512-b472150b>
> Your Subscription <http://www.listbox.com>
>
_______________________________________________
developer mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.open-zfs.org/mailman/listinfo/developer

Reply via email to